JW.org now refuses to accept that Witnesses are creationists because “some creationists” teach things that conflict with their ideas

JW.org has posted an FAQ page in response to the question “Do You Believe in Creationism?” Watchtower’s response? “No.” The reason? “Jehovah’s Witnesses do believe that God created everything. But we do not agree with creationism. Why not? Because a number of creationist ideas actually conflict with the Bible.”

Anybody who understands the meaning of the words “creationist” and “creationism” and who is familiar with Witness teachings will find the above answer both perplexing and self-contradictory.

Put simply, Watchtower is suffering from an identity crisis. On the one hand it rejects evolution, and on the other it seeks to dodge the creationist label because it doesn’t agree with what all other creationists believe. Such reasoning is tantamount to a person refusing to accept the designation “christian” because he or she doesn’t agree with what all professed christians believe.

Witnesses might be surprised to learn that Watchtower’s ‘refuting’ of creationism is nothing new. Back in 1986 a Questions From Readers article was published which stated, in part (bold is mine)…

“In these 1980’s, ‘creationism’ has become a true ‘ism’ because of its adoption by political pressure groups, such as the Moral Majority. It is no longer a neutral term, but embodies extreme fundamentalist views of the Bible, such as the view that God created the earth and everything upon it in six days of 24 hours each. There are now more than 350 books in circulation setting out such “creationism” dogma. Jehovah’s Witnesses reject the unreasonable theories of ‘creationism’ in favor of what the Bible really teaches about ‘creation.’” (w86 9/1 p.30)

Some “young earth creationists” believe that there were dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark

What both this 1986 article and the JW.org FAQ page fail to acknowledge is that not all creationists necessarily share the same views, in just the same way as not every christian denomination shares identical beliefs. There is room for variety. For example, it is possible to declare yourself a creationist but not be a “young earth creationist,” i.e. someone who believes the earth was created in six literal days.

Numerous sources confirm that creationists do not necessarily have to agree on every point. In Darwinism Comes To America Ronald L. Numbers observes, “Creationists of today are not in agreement concerning what was created according to Genesis.” And, as the book Science, Evolution and Creationism explains, “Advocates of the ideas collectively known as ‘creationism’ and, recently, ‘intelligent design creationism’ hold a wide variety of views. Most broadly, a ‘creationist’ is someone who rejects natural scientific explanations of the known universe in favor of special creation by a supernatural entity.”

This is where a Witness might argue, “Ah, but Witnesses do not reject ‘natural scientific explanations of the known universe.'” Indeed JW.org’s FAQ declares that Witnesses “have no objection to credible scientific research.” But is that really the case?

Evolution – a “false teaching?”

In a recent Watchtower magazine the Society reaffirmed its condemnation of evolution as a “widespread false teaching that blinds people to the truth about God.” (w13 10/15 p.7) Now, as unpleasant as this may be for some readers to consider, whether you believe in God or not, it is now impossible to justifiably deny that evolution is a real process. It is an astounding mechanism that has been unfolding for countless millennia, and is even happening right in front of us.

The existence of hospital superbugs is proof that evolution is a real process that shapes the development of all living things

The reason why hospital superbugs exist is because successive generations of bacteria with the necessary genes flourish due to having developed an immunity to antibiotics, which flush out any strands of bacteria without the needed adaptations.

In essence, this is an accelerated version of “natural selection” where the changing environment determines the survival of the species, which (in the case of bacteria) reproduces over minutes or hours rather than years or decades. Just because bacteria are small, doesn’t mean that similar environmental forces are not influencing the development of much larger organisms including animals and humans – albeit incrementally over unfathomable periods of time.

If you disagree with the above, and believe that each “superbug” is created on the spot by God the moment new drugs are developed as some kind of cruel joke to thwart the efforts of doctors, then you are of course entitled to your opinion. But in denying the process I have described you are denying clear evidence of evolution, which is precisely what the Watchtower continues to do right up to the present.

And yet, Watchtower wants the outside world to think of it as trendy and not “anti-science.” It sees itself as accommodating towards the latest scientific evidence, which is why it refuses to accept its proper designation as a fundamentally creationist faith.

“Limping upon two different opinions”

Elijah denounced unfaithful Israelites for “limping upon two different opinions”

Ironically, the scripture in 1 Timothy that the Society has used to label apostates as “mentally diseased” actually applies that expression to those who work themselves into a frenzy “over questionings and debates about words” – which is precisely what the Society seems to be doing with regards to creationism. (1 Tim 6:4) They are arguing that the word doesn’t apply to them because they don’t like the image it portrays.

Moreover, at 1 Kings 18:21 the prophet Elijah condemned the unfaithful Israelites of his day for being similarly indecisive. He said, “How long will you be limping upon two different opinions? If Jehovah is the [true] God, go following him; but if Ba′al is, go following him.”

In dancing between designations, and picking and choosing which words should or shouldn’t be applied to them, Watchtower is similarly “limping upon two different opinions.” On the one hand they dismiss evolution, but on the other they don’t like the stigma surrounding creationism. So, which is it to be?






Further reading…

Related videos…

91 thoughts on “JW.org’s identity crisis: Jehovah’s Witnesses “do not agree with creationism”

  • August 20, 2013 at 6:36 am

    JWs are determined to be outside of everything ‘worldly’. They deny they are fundamentalists, protestants, a religion, a church, part of Christendom and part of the world. They are all of these things that they pretend to reject. Pretending not to be ‘creationists’ is simply an addition to a list of nonsense.

  • August 20, 2013 at 6:43 am

    Part of the whole JW mentality is to be as different and unique as possible in order to reinforce the idea that they, and only they, have “the Truth.” But merely being different in no way means being “right.” The more they try to be different, the more they end up resembling the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. The WTBTS has become a legalistic organization only interested in self-preservation. The “leaders” are puppets of their inherited belief-system and blindly perpetuate the downward spiral in to unrecoverable hypocrisy. – Matthew 15:6-8

  • August 20, 2013 at 6:50 am

    I guess because God only created Jesus, and everything was subsequently created by him they do not fall into the category of creationists. They also believe in an old Earth and do not believe in 7 literal creative days. However they are equally as bonkers as any creationist I have come across (except maybe Ray Comfort!)

  • August 20, 2013 at 7:46 am

    Oubliette has it on-point, JW’s and Watchtower seek out being “unique” for a niche market. And, yes, that read market, because all teachings derive from two main sources–Christadelphians and Advent Christian Church–with a Watchtower spin on these through the decades to add a unique ‘flavor’. This keeps the Watchtower from being just another one of the many millennial groups or another anti-hellfire, anti-trinitarian groups. It doesn’t make for the biggest or the fastest growing–that goes to Assemblies of God which combined Wesleyan and Adventist ideas, but it does garner a sizeable market — even if 1% of a multi-billion dollar industry.

    Examining Watchtower policy–yes, it appears to be a personal morality code, but it is primarily a code of conduct for its “sales reps” who market its product and literature.

    This is why the average JW will immediately balk when being included in Adventist groups, fundamentalists, and absolutely rejecting of term Christendom.

    The arguments used in most JW literature to refute Evolution when compared to its Adventist and Christadelphian heritage are the same–right down to the framing of scriptures to refute arguments and logic used.

  • August 20, 2013 at 8:27 am

    Evolution is the development and adaptation, and branching into the many varieties each kind of created species develop into due to genes and environment . Yes we were created, but Yes there are processes of evolution that play a part. When you dive into Quantum Mechanics or even microbiology , you see life is not just an accident. But many species adapt and change due to environment, not that actually change into another species . All kinds of species stay within their kind. But he watchtower are creationists whether the think so or not. just as the article stated, many views in the creationist statement .

  • August 20, 2013 at 10:26 am

    Jehovah’s Witnesses are an ultra-conservative, fundamentalist, pseudo-intellectual, evangelical, creationist, doomsday, destructive cult.

  • August 20, 2013 at 10:47 am

    Congratulations, Cedars, for accepting that Evolution is, from the evidence, a fact. For those of you who cannot accept this, here is a get out! Science still has no explanation of how, for example, reptiles became mammals. Maybe God could be the one who gave a push and deliniated kinds. I don’t know all the answers but I do believe in evolution. Science is not like religion. It relies upon theories and evidence to support it. A real scientist will try to destroy their theory. If it stands up to their attack, it’s passed on for peer review. I know that science history is littered with egos and that is regrettable. However, the scientific method is, I believe, the pinnacle of human intellect.

    If God exists, then I am sure that he is pleased to see that we are using the intelligence he gave us to forward society through exploring the natural world and the universe beyond.

  • August 20, 2013 at 11:26 am

    Of course, JWs are creationists, just as they are part of Christendom, the World, Protestantism and everything they pretend they are not. From Darwin onwards it has been clear that ‘species’ is not an absolute. Over time and generations species evolve into new species. How many generations I am away from the single celled creature that I share as a common ancestor with the cat, blackbird, spider and rhino, I do not know. I remember the ‘Evolution or Creation’ book published by the JWs in the 1950s. It being impossible to deny the variety of cows and dogs bred selectively from a common ancestor, the JWs decided to do their own definition of the Genesis word ‘kind’. Why anyone should continue to read the Genesis story as anything more than a poetic myth from the Ancient Middle East is a tribute to the promoters of the Bible as something more than A N Other set of fallible, man made writings.

  • August 20, 2013 at 11:58 am

    As other commenters have pointed out, this is a religion that is extraordinarily concerned with its own supposed “uniqueness”. Thus the JW balk at _any_ classification scheme that would categorize them together with believers of some other faith. There was a period, starting in the Rutherford era, when they even refused to call their own set of beliefs a _religion_, and insisted that what Jesus taught was something else than religion (the latter term being solely negative). When it comes to terms like “fundamentalist” and “creationist”, the Watchtower falls back on idiosynchratic definitions that would somehow exclude the Witnesses from being included.

    For instance, I would define as Christian fundamentalists people who insist on the literal truth of the first 11 chapters of Genesis, adhere to a Biblicist ideology (infallible scriptures), and oppose archaeology, scholarship and science whenever their findings do not agree with such positions (higher criticism, evolution). Then Jehovah’s Witnesses are clearly included. But the Watchtower may claim that they are not fundamentalists because many fundies are involved in politics, and the JW are not. Hurray! No fundamentalists here!

    Same thing with creationism. Anyone who has read such “classics” as “Life – How Did it Get Here?” knows that the Witnesses are as creationist as anyone gets, but the writing staff at Brooklyn apparently sees “creationists” as wholly synonymous with “Young Earth creationists”, regularly lambasted in Watchtower literature (whenever their publications are not used as sources for general anti-evolution arguments).

    Sure enough, the YEC are the majority these days, but there are others that are “Day-Age” creationists just like the Witnesses. You never see Old Earth creationists mentioned in Watchtower literature, though. Instead there will be slighting remarks about YECs whose ideas are supposedly “extreme” and even “ubiblical” (a term that in this subculture has about the same connotations as “un-American” in the McCarthy era).

    In fact you can argue very well that the Genesis writer did intend normal 24-hour days for Creation Week. The reason the Watchtower has traditionally been so enamoured with Day-Age interpretations probably has nothing to do with such being somewhat more scientifically plausible (the huge absurdity of a 6,000-year-old earth is avoided). Rather it all comes down to Fred Franz’ enthusiasm for a scheme that would have the Seventh Day expiring in 1975 or shortly thereafter, which would be a oh-so-fitting “time for God to act”, i.e. bring Armageddon. We know how well that prediction went.

  • August 20, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    The whole creation or evolution debate is really about preference and little about surety. If the percieved action of “supergerms” with the endless list of variables is enough to prove evolution in your mind go float your boat. For me it is not nearly enough. Same applies to creation.

  • August 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm

    It really is not rocket science.

    If there is evidence for evolution and evidence for design, then both must be true.

    The fact is that through scientific observation and fossil evidence, both of them do support an evolving process and that of design.

    So to my understanding at this stage our Creator and his creative agents has created life on this planet through an evolving process, after first seeding this planet with life.

    When it came to intelligent beings like us, then genetic engineering was involved to achieve the human life form that we are today.
    That is how I have come to understand, through the written evidence that I have at hand.

  • August 20, 2013 at 10:18 pm

    “Many species adapt and change due to environment, not that actually change into another species”. It is as clear as a day, Jehovah’s Witnesses adapt and change in “APOSTATES” due to environment… Like me, I adapted and changed in an “APOSTATE” to survive the environment of lies, secrecy and mind control techniques and all sort of stupidity of the GB.

    I used to be a “HUMAN Jehovah’s Witness” and I am NOW a “HUMAN APOSTATE”! due to environment. I have not ACTUALLY changed into another species, I am still a “HUMAN”. I used to eat ONLY on JEHOVAH’S TABLE, I eat now on both TABLES, Jehovah’s and Demons’ all this due to environment…!!!

    The same applies to the “ANGEL OF ABYSS”. He used to be, according to WTS publications, SATAN and he is now JESUS! Evolution? Satan changing into Jesus due to environment: Human teachings, lies, …!!

  • August 21, 2013 at 1:30 am

    Maybe we should tell JWs Evolution is like “a lamp that gets brighter as we get closer to the end”.. they seem to like that excuse for ‘evolving’ doctrine.

    And it’s funny that the average JW has no problem with the idea of a 9 person composite slave (nine people who are in fact one slave) yet laugh at the logic behind the trinity for employing this same kind of thing, u know 3 persons one God..

    Fact is like all revolutions and uprisings, the IBS have now become the very thing they hated initially ie established hierarchical bureaucratic man-made religion.. Religion is a racket! pah!

  • August 21, 2013 at 1:39 am

    Also it annoys me that the whole JW world view is that ‘Christendom’ is full of lies and devil lead.. When in fact the church (and Islam) have been the light of learning through many a dark age. Can you guess who came up with the truth behind the mechanism of inheritance that underpins the theory of evolution.. er.. it was an Augustinian monk called Gregor Mendel.. Was he disfellowshipped for apostasy for challenging God.. nope!

    Wow! now i started on the subject of Mendel (he has been a hero of mine since i studied genetics).. i stumbled upon this:



    and same search reveals:
    The page “List of Jehovah’s witness scientists” does not exist

    Looks like even the dreaded RC Church are more open to Truth than the JWs.

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:01 am

    Evolution as the mechanism by which speciation and hence the diversity of life occurs is an established fact. There is no doubt about it. The evidence is elucidated, not from from the fossil record (which merely supports the fact) but from genetics, phylogeny and ontogeny. Evolution does not negate the need for a creator, advances in abiogenesis research probably will sooner than later.

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:08 am

    Eugenics of the ruling has been very successful . . .

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:10 am

    Eugenics has nothing to do with topic.

    • August 21, 2013 at 3:13 am

      Yes it most certainly does .

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:27 am

    Why? I would love to read your explanation….

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:35 am

    Zeebo, I, stumbled upon this, from JWs Publications:

    1) http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=w08+3%2F15+p.+30+par.+5

    2) Ref: w67 5/15 p. 319 Questions From Readers

    How can it be said that Jesus could have produced perfect children from an imperfect wife? Would not the children, according to the laws of genetics, have inherited imperfection from their mother?—F. S., England.

    The basis for offering this as a possibility is the example of what occurred in the case of Jesus’ own birth. He was born perfect even though he had an imperfect mother, Mary.
    In saying this, we do not deny the scientifically demonstrated fact that the union of a human sperm and a human egg cell or ovum, both of which contain chromosomes and genes, results eventually in a new organism with hereditary characteristics of both parents. This process has been observed and can now hardly be called a theory.
    In Jesus’ own case it appears that Jehovah used one of the ova in the womb of the virgin, but imperfect, woman Mary. (Rom. 3:23) Had he not done so, Jesus, from a physical standpoint, would not have been a real descendant of Abraham and King David, as had been foretold. (Gen. 22:18; Isa. 11:1, 2; Luke 3:23-38) Thus we believe that Jesus looked like a Jew, that he had human characteristics that were observable in his mother.
    The question may now arise, Would not Jesus have inherited some imperfection from Mary? No, the Bible plainly shows that Jesus was born perfect. (1 Pet. 2:22; John 8:46) In this way he was the equivalent of perfect Adam and could serve as the ransom to take away sins. (Heb. 7:26; 9:26; Rom. 5:18) We should keep in mind that we are not dealing just with genetic laws of dominant and recessive characteristics. No, perfection and imperfection are also involved. We have no experience with the results of uniting perfection with imperfection. Scientists cannot measure human perfection or imperfection resulting from sin. Nor can they predict the powerful effect a perfect male sperm would have on an imperfect ovum. But it is evident from what occurred in Jesus’ case that the perfect male part of the reproduction dominated the imperfection inherent in Mary. Jesus’ perfect Father transferred the perfect life of his Son to the womb of Mary and the result was a wholly perfect offspring, Jesus.—Gal. 4:4.
    Accepting what the inspired Scriptures say took place as to Jesus’ conception and birth, we can conclude that by reason of Jesus’ being entirely perfect he could have fathered perfect children even with an imperfect wife. Of course, that was not God’s will for Jesus. (Heb. 10:5-10; Matt. 26:39) Nonetheless, that potential was apparently there.

  • August 21, 2013 at 4:06 am

    Ok wasn’t exactly what i was talking about but interesting none the less… even if characteristics are not expressed in the offspring the genes are always there in the recessive form. But i don’t think this causes any issues as i would never suggest that Jesus’ body was not fully human.. the orthodox view is JC is fully human and fully God etc so this doesn’t effect mainstream Christian teachings.
    In fact i think JC went to great lengths to demonstrate this fully human nature.. i mean why die on the cross if he wasn’t human? its kind of a party trick if he was just an angel spirit thing.. oh and when he resurrected himself he went to great pains to show that his corruptible human body was also resurrected and sanctified.. But that’s just what i think and everyone to their own!

    One strange thing many fundamentalists don’t quite get (JWs included) is that the bible as they know it has a history and the canon was only finished in its present form in the 400s.. and by those same members of ‘Christendom’ who are they vilify as the architects of the great apostasy. Seriously i encourage everyone to look at the development of books of the bible AND read some non-canonical books like the epistle of Barnabas. Regardless of if you believe it, when you place the bible in context and with supporting material of the same age its clear that early Christians were always proto-Trinitarian (or at least binitarian)… Now im not saying anyone should believe as i do (or don’t), just do some reading in persute of truth and don’t be lazy and allow an org to lie to you (reference to trinity book and tertullian, martyr and the crew)

  • August 21, 2013 at 4:18 am

    Não somos nós as Testemunhas de Jeová que não acreditamos ou deixamos de acreditar em alguma coisa. São os do Corpo dos Governantes – e somente eles – quem decide no que crer e, desta forma, nos obriga – sob ameaças de desassociações – a que também creiamos em seus ensinos danosos.

    Nós, o povo de Jeová, estamos acordando para esta realidade. Muito em breve todos nós ‘derrubaremos este profeta louco de sobre nossos lombos’, como aconteceu com Balaão e sua jumenta companheira.

    Apóstolo TDS

    Added by Admin Jeni:English Translation per Google Translate: Are we not Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe or do not believe in anything. Corps are the Rulers – and only they – who decides what to believe and thus forces us – under threat of desassociações – that also believe in his teachings harmful.

    We, the people of Jehovah, we are waking up to this reality. Very soon we all ‘mad prophet of this overthrow of our loins’, as with Balaam and his donkey companion.

  • August 21, 2013 at 6:44 am

    I totally agree the GB want to isolate it’s members as regards creationism…and possibly a non-thinking sheep may have asked the question… Do I believe in creationism? I will ask an elder what to believe….and hence has lead to an article.

    So when the GB has cross referenced Genesis with Isaiah they have concluded through Holy Spirit and God’s guidance that they are most definitely not part of creationism.

    On a more serious response, I do believe that species can become drug resistant, as to whether or not the term evolution applies I have no opinion. But as far as believing each species evolved into a new species starting from a simple cell or amino acid, I do not agree. I have a background in chemistry and what I have learned about the chemistry on enantiomers leads me to conclude that humans did not evolve from monkeys or any other species as many believe.

    An enantiomer is a molecule that is a mirror image of another molecule with completely different properties. The chemistry behind this is both interesting, detailed and conclusive. But I wont do a science project here and now.

    The main points we all agree on is the GB want to segregate even more.

  • August 21, 2013 at 11:13 am

    Some very interesting views. For those who believe that Adam and Eve, perfection and all those other things has to answer one question. Who and what were the Neanderthals and other human cousins? Did they spring from the ground like Adam? Did they eat of the tree? Did Satan tempt them? Is there a Neanderthal Messiah? Sorry if I come across as glib, but I really would like to know how a believer in humanity as separate copes with genetically unique cousins of Homo Sapiens.

  • August 21, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    Cedars was using the so called superbugs as a quick and simple example of evolution in action, he wasn’t trying to prove evolution or anything like that. That said he wasn’t as you state referring to “perceived action” he was referring to an observable phenomena which is something quite different.

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:14 pm

    I saw someone mentioned Eugenics. It should be noted that Eugenics has nothing to do with Evolution. In fact it’s arguably the polar opposite, and has more in common with creationism and intelligent design.


  • August 22, 2013 at 3:18 am

    As far as Neanderthal fossils are concerned scientists are not in agreement whether or not they are human fossils or a completely different species.

    We know that a species between a monkey and human does not exist today. But who is to say that a monkey will not start to evolve into an Neanderthal again in the future…..if bugs are becoming drug resistant, who am I to say a monkey cannot turn into a Neanderthal and then into a human…..

  • August 22, 2013 at 3:40 am

    Neanderthals and modern humans share the same variant of the language gene FOXP2 (whatever that is) scientists state…this means their IQ must have been higher than 70.

    Its telling this because my ex is a JW and now I am starting to think that he is less intelligent than a Neanderthal was as his language and communication skills are definitely a load of rubbish.. because he just parrots watchtower nonsense, miss applies scripture, and cant think for himself…which apparently the Neanderthals could…..looks like some JW’s have reverted back further than Neanderthals.

    Maybe a species does exist between monkey and human….a non thinking, stubborn, JW, who will do whatever the watchtower says even if it is not practical from a human standpoint

  • August 22, 2013 at 5:44 am

    Sorry folks, but science has confirmed through genetics that Neanderthals were a separate type of human. They were not Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens and Homo Neanderthal shared a common ancestor. They weren’t just a different type of Homo sapien.

    The whole genesis account is a story. We evolved just like everything else on this planet. We are no different from any other mammal.

  • August 22, 2013 at 7:14 am

    “Sorry folks, but science has confirmed through genetics that Neanderthals were a separate type of human”

    If they were human then they weren’t monkey’s

    I have read that scientists don’t agree…..hey but we can’t believe everything we read can we…………?

    Whatever floats your boat George, but I do agree with you that the watchtower article about creationism is a load of nonsence

  • August 22, 2013 at 2:00 pm

    Might be worth educating yourself as to what evolution really is. Also we are not descended from monkeys although monkeys and apes (which we are) do share a common ancestor.

  • August 22, 2013 at 5:27 pm

    From what I have studied, we as a human race have been genetically engineered from the Simian line of evolution.
    So our base foundation is mammal and Simian.

  • August 22, 2013 at 7:07 pm

    I found problems with WT virgin birth too back in 1966/7 or about then, I baulked at the pioneer requirement to believe everything the Society taught. That’s history now but I do know how to explain it. Link to page on my website: http://www.yahweh-immanuel.info/virgin%20birth.html
    Its a bit big so unfair to drop on somebody elses’ server space, I was reading a scientific/technology news and just realized that’s how God did it [one way but never found any other].

  • August 23, 2013 at 4:51 am

    “Might be worth educating yourself as to what evolution really is.” Fair comment Angus, maybe I will………………I have plenty of time now that I am not preaching and it would be a constructive use of my time and seems quite interesting too!

  • August 23, 2013 at 6:38 am

    Yes, modern humans, bonobos and chimpanzees all shared a common ancestor. So, humans, bonobos and chimpanzees are all forms of higher hominid.

    How we arrived is important. How we treat each other and all other life is vital to our survival. By falsely separating human beings from all other life, we have been fooled into thinking that human beings are somehow in charge, and that other life is in some way inferior.

  • August 30, 2013 at 10:19 pm

    I wonder what the lower hominid was then?
    Funny, I could never accept the JW view of creation fully, as I’ve always loved biology and studying nature. I was definitely limping along on two opinions for a while when I was a JW. Silly pseudo-scientific nonsense.

  • November 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm

    Yes! I have recently discovered what you saying about the epistles not included in the Bible. There is a wealth of history that seems to change everything. I am also examining Paul now, this man who lived 100 years after Jesus and is responsible for all but 4 books in the “New Testament”. His motives aren’t clear to me. But the Bible is inspired so it must be correct. And then, on top of all that, regular history and eugenics seem somehow involved. Researching blood at the same time, it all seems linked.

    So much to know still. I sincerely apologize to all for going completely off topic.

  • December 16, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    “Superbugs” can not be used to support evolutionary theory because they don’t “evolve”, they “adapt”; for example there are NO EXAMPLES of a “cold virus” BECOMING a “flu virus”, even though they may have similarities in how they attack a body/immune system, they are still different and they STAY THAT WAY. Not a single paleontologist or zoologist has yet proven to find something that is cross-species; mixes of different TRAITS of known animals past and/or present, but NOT a past or present MIX-IN-ONE creature – the platypus has very distinct platypus DNA for example, so much so that they even were able to find an “early relative” of the platypus by the DNA in a tooth, but a “toothed platypus” is much more likely a toothed variety of platypus than it is a platypus that was evolving from a crocodile/other reptile, but for some reason changed from being like all the other reptiles that still exist.

    Your survival-of-the-fittest argument died before you said it because that falls apart on every level; it would result in eliminations of species eventually leading to only ONE, but instead we have millions/billions. To add to the problems with that theory are the theories of evolving to hide in surroundings while you have birds like the Himalayan Monal and the Mandarin Duck that are colored bright as any rainbow, have NO defense mechanisms, and are living JUST FINE. When ANY evolutionist can explain those birds then they MAY BEGIN to have a case.

    All of that being said, yes “witnesses” should stop making claims of being this or not being that and simply PROVE BY ACTION our Christianity.

    • December 16, 2013 at 2:36 pm

      Welcome Elias. I applaud you for commenting, although your remarks indicate a fundamental misunderstanding of what evolution is and how it works. I would recommend you do more research on the subject. Then you will understand, for example, that evolution does not mean that a cold virus can become a flu virus, nor does survival of the fittest mean that all species will eventually die off leaving just one.

  • December 17, 2013 at 5:56 am

    Elias, I am afraid that you have misunderstood evolution. If you are a JW, then it’s not your fault. The WTBTS have consistently misrepresented evolution in its publications.

    Let me deal with your points as best I can. Please note that I am a teacher by trade, and not a fully trained scientist.

    We rely on the fossil record to examine extinct species. Please bear in mind that not all dead creatures are fossilised. It takes special conditions for a fossil to be made. Therefore, we do not have a complete picture of all life that has gone before. It is not surprising, then, that we do not find “cross species” that often.

    I would direct you to the exciting discoveries in China of the evolution of birds from dinosaurs. Fossil evidence is being found for this happening.

    The survival of the fittest is not a big battle to discover the greatest life form! The phrase simply means that life forms that survive get to breed and pass on their DNA to the next generation, thus continuing the species.

    As for brightly coloured birds, well, they have strategies for survival that do not rely on camouflage. Their brightly coloured plumage allows the females to judge who is the fittest male. Many species have attributes that are for this reason.

    Remember also that the theory of evolution has changed as more evidence is found.

    It is accepted by the vast majority of scientists, and is, in my opinion, a fact.

    I realise that you may come to a different conclusion, as is your right. However, I would urge you to research evolution and allow scientists to explain it rather than the WTBTS.

    Peace be with you


  • December 18, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Elias writes that evolution “would result in eliminations of species eventually leading to only ONE”.

    The strange notion that diversity of life is somehow an argument _against_ evolution indeed looms large in classical Watchtower literature. The 1967 book “Did Man Get Here By Evolution Or By Creation?” points out (p. 58) that horses have upper front teeth and cows do not; somehow this is apparently crushing evidence against evolution! On page 34 we are told: “Since the single cell was so satisfactory in the beginning, why would it evolve into more complex forms of life? Also, when we consider that single-celled organisms, such as the amoeba, are still with us today, unchanged, what would explain why some of them evolved upward while others did not?” (Variant of “Why are there still monkeys?”, a classical creationist talking point which, sure enough, turns up on page 84 of 1985’s “Life – How Did It Get Here?”)

    The notion of different survival niches, the fact that the original form of an organism does NOT have to go extinct for a changed form to emerge as well, even the very simple fact that different body layouts can sometimes perform equally well — all this would seem to be beyond the mental scope of the writers in Brooklyn. (We might as well ask: Why did the supposedly fair and loving Creator DENY cows upper front teeth?)

    Incidentally, on the same page (34) of “Did Man Get Here By Evolution Or By Creation?” the writers deliver the final nail to Darwin’s coffin by pointing out that no originally eyeless organism would EVER have the idea of evolving an eye: “How could it know that an eye would be an improvement when it had never seen before? How could it know that sight was even possible?”

    The Watchtower version of evolution is apparently some kind of deliberate self-improvement whereby a blind organism mysteriously has a hunch that seeing would be cool, and so it makes every effort to squeeze out an eye or two.

    In a way one should be grateful to the writers for giving away that they are utterly clueless, ignorantly lambasting a science they have made no serious attempt to really understand.

  • December 28, 2013 at 1:11 am

    First of all if you don’t post my opinions in the blog then I consider yourself just like the GB of WBTS. OR else give me a reply to my email.
    Regarding your evolution
    Just read about Evolution in
    [link removed] under the heading
    And then see just see the article about Piltdown man in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
    and about Karlmarx under the heading FEB 21 1848 KARL MARX PUBLISHES THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO and then read [link removed]

    Respectfully calling you (I know your real name) as Br. Cedar, I myself is a biologist. See the bacteria in labs and near sinks has become resistance to these chemicals. But its sill the same bacteria. It has now only become a chemical resistance bacteria or super bug or germ. But note this bacteria never transformed into another living creature like mouse why it has not even transformed into simple Amoeba. If you still believe evolution I call you a monkey because you are the image of the monkey not God that is why like evolution. You are degrading your own reasoning ability with that of the image of an monkey. Or else you come and worship Indian God Hanuman (Monkey God) as you believe in evolution. Those who believe in evolution are actually worshippers of Hanuman which is Satan. You are worse than a Muslim who has much better faith in God than you with his scientific findings and comparing the millions of year’s fossils with that of the present living creatures such as. [link removed]
    I love Jehovah but not man or GB of WBTS. You still don’t know why Jehovah is the only true. It is not JW’s teaching it is my own research because I knew Jehovah right from my birth from my father who was or is not a JW. He directly showed from the Bible that Jehovah is God and later I met the JW’s. Have you compared Jehovah with other gods? If you tell all those JWs are fault OK I don’t care but you tell me then where is true salvation other than hanging on to Jehovah and Jesus. Will you then hang on to Shiva or Ganesha Indian gods you just read about them you will indeed vomit their actions where there is no spirituality but only fleshly. You never praise Jehovah in your website you just only condemned WBTS and GB who are actually sinful men like us. You condemn them I don’t care because WBTS and GB will not give salvation but try to Praise and make people to build faith in Jehovah and Jesus just as Robert King do. The person who is finding fault on others must first be correct then condemn others. First of all the way of bring up of children in western world itself is at fault than what I see in India (of course still to some extent now). First of all you westerns must learn that discipline including GB of WBTS. Think of your own comments in your own biography posted in http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/the-story-of-cedars-a-prisoner-no-more . I didn’t do not even one in what you have mentioned about your personal things where outsiders(idol worshipers, drunkards my critics, my enemies), my friends, my wife and my parents and lastly my congregation members are testimony to that . Still I don’t boast of myself and condemn others although they (anyone or GB of WTS) are at fault on certain matters as I know I am sinner and can fall into sin at any point of time in my life though I am a lover of Jehovah and Jesus.

    [Note, certain links have been removed and the poster has been blocked for insulting remarks as per our posting guidelines, but the comment itself has been left to show the poster that we are not “just like the GB of WBTS.”]

    • December 28, 2013 at 1:35 am

      As far as I can gather, Basava, from your inchoate ramblings, you are a Jehovah’s Witness who wants to imagine that he believes in the Watchtower Jehovah, not because he has been subjected to the mind control techniques employed by the Watchtower Society, but because he has done his own research. I doubt that you have really convinced yourself of this absurd notion, but your outpouring of anger and ignorance demonstrates merely your anger and ignorance.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: