- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,17:46) Quote i was raised a JW . . . . i was taught when i went during the 1970's and 1980's. . . . just curious because i was taught that those 7 days were literal 7 days –peace2all.
I don't know how this is possible. But a book written in 1946 (Let God be True) shows that they certainly didn't think they were 24 hour days back then. From memory, I'm quite certain they didn't believe this in the 80's either.
Quote OK, I see your position. Did you think at the time that it was insane to believe that dinosaurs died in the alleged flood? If so, did you express that to anyone, and did you get any reaction?
–stu
I seeeee what's going on here. We're playing the “create false arguments” game.
I could not find this belief either. What I found on the internet were statments like this:
I have heard some Witnesses say that the dinosaurs were killed off in the flood,
Unfortunately, “some” Witnesses WERE not very scientific. But it's different to say that “some” Witnesses had their odd theories about things and to say “JW's believe….”
Well if some JWs do claim this as a JW belief, then it needs to be treated as such.However if THE COMMITTEE has explicitly said that in their authority of all JW myths that it is officially NOT a JW claim then I would withdraw the suggestion, of course.
Have you told me what year you think the flood took place yet? If I may assume it is since the earliest recorded history of the Jews, say well within the last 10,000 years, then of course the claim that dinosaurs died in the flood is a joke, because dinosaurs were all well and truly gone 65 million years ago, and there has been no global flood in the past 10,000 years.
Stuart
Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,17:55) Stu, I've mentioned Dinosaur poop to you like 3 times. I thought you would have jumped all over that, but I guess you're just not putting it together. Have you ever considered what's in the dino poop? And, what does Genesis say about other animals eating other animals? If you want to create some argument about dinosaurs, start there, (in the poop) because that actually is an argument. I guess some people just aren't that into dino poop.
I thought you were just obsessed with poop!I'm not familiar with the contents of dinosaur coprolites, apart from being able to guess the obvious things like bacterial remains.
Do you have a devastating point to make here?
Stuart
Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,18:31) Ok, this took forever to find. I had to go through a lot of internet garbage (people repeatedly claiming JW's believe that humans walked with dinosaurs) until I found this. Since I can't actually find any reference to this belief but only people saying this is what they thought they believed, I think the following seems accurate: Quote Rather curiously, the 1961 edition of the New World Translation (with the distintive bright green cover), had end leaf maps bound into the front and back of the Bible. The one in the front was of the Middle East / Mediterranean area and it had little artist's renditions of some of the events associated with places on the map (e.g., I think there was smoke and Moses on Mt. Sinai). There were a few dinosaurs randomly place throughout the map, from which one could draw the reasonable inference that humans and dinos co-existed at some point in time. However, as far as I know (and I really searched when I was a Dub), they have never definitively stated whether or not humans and dinosaurs co-existed. I do remember reading something to the effect that the dinosaurs may have become extinct by the time Adam and Eve were created, but that they were unsure and the dinos could have died in the flood.
Here's a link that has a picture, which is probably the picture and evidence that started this idea. I guess this does suggest that in 1961 they believed that dinosaurs at one time existed with people.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw….-IMPACT
Apparently, the dinosaur lived in Africa.
Well I am blown away by the confidence displayed in their doctrines and the cogency of the argument for their very determined position on the subject!Stuart
Quote Well if some JWs do claim this as a JW belief, then it needs to be treated as such. No, that doesn't make sense.
In the same time period, some scientists believed…..[you name it]
If you like, I can pick on all the things that fringe scientists believed in the 60's. But that wouldn't “prove” anything, would it? It would only prove that “some” scientists had their own ideas.I for example, can say that “I believe stu is….[whatever.]” It doesnt' mean that you can say “JW's believe….”
Quote Have you told me what year you think the flood took place yet? If I may assume it is since the earliest recorded history of the Jews, say well within the last 10,000 years, then of course the claim that dinosaurs died in the flood is a joke, because dinosaurs were all well and truly gone 65 million years ago, and there has been no global flood in the past 10,000 years. Stu, may I ask: What was the general scientific belief on this in the early 60's? You are stating what you believe now and comparing it to what “some” JW's believed years ago.
Some fringe scientists today and many pseudoscientists continue to believe that a plesiosaur lives in Loch Ness, even though no one has ever been able to find convincing proof. And until I hear from the science “committee” that there is no Nessy, I shall continue to believe that this is what scientists believe. Does this sound reasonable to you?
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 25 2010,18:58) Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,18:31) Ok, this took forever to find. I had to go through a lot of internet garbage (people repeatedly claiming JW's believe that humans walked with dinosaurs) until I found this. Since I can't actually find any reference to this belief but only people saying this is what they thought they believed, I think the following seems accurate: Quote Rather curiously, the 1961 edition of the New World Translation (with the distintive bright green cover), had end leaf maps bound into the front and back of the Bible. The one in the front was of the Middle East / Mediterranean area and it had little artist's renditions of some of the events associated with places on the map (e.g., I think there was smoke and Moses on Mt. Sinai). There were a few dinosaurs randomly place throughout the map, from which one could draw the reasonable inference that humans and dinos co-existed at some point in time. However, as far as I know (and I really searched when I was a Dub), they have never definitively stated whether or not humans and dinosaurs co-existed. I do remember reading something to the effect that the dinosaurs may have become extinct by the time Adam and Eve were created, but that they were unsure and the dinos could have died in the flood.
Here's a link that has a picture, which is probably the picture and evidence that started this idea. I guess this does suggest that in 1961 they believed that dinosaurs at one time existed with people.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw….-IMPACT
Apparently, the dinosaur lived in Africa.
Well I am blown away by the confidence displayed in their doctrines and the cogency of the argument for their very determined position on the subject!Stuart
I'm not sure what you're speaking about? They never had a “doctrine” about this, but rather, the art department drew what appears to be a couple dinosaurs on the map. No words, no explanation, no doctrine. No “determined position” as you state.Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,19:12) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 25 2010,18:58) Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,18:31) Ok, this took forever to find. I had to go through a lot of internet garbage (people repeatedly claiming JW's believe that humans walked with dinosaurs) until I found this. Since I can't actually find any reference to this belief but only people saying this is what they thought they believed, I think the following seems accurate: Quote Rather curiously, the 1961 edition of the New World Translation (with the distintive bright green cover), had end leaf maps bound into the front and back of the Bible. The one in the front was of the Middle East / Mediterranean area and it had little artist's renditions of some of the events associated with places on the map (e.g., I think there was smoke and Moses on Mt. Sinai). There were a few dinosaurs randomly place throughout the map, from which one could draw the reasonable inference that humans and dinos co-existed at some point in time. However, as far as I know (and I really searched when I was a Dub), they have never definitively stated whether or not humans and dinosaurs co-existed. I do remember reading something to the effect that the dinosaurs may have become extinct by the time Adam and Eve were created, but that they were unsure and the dinos could have died in the flood.
Here's a link that has a picture, which is probably the picture and evidence that started this idea. I guess this does suggest that in 1961 they believed that dinosaurs at one time existed with people.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw….-IMPACT
Apparently, the dinosaur lived in Africa.
Well I am blown away by the confidence displayed in their doctrines and the cogency of the argument for their very determined position on the subject!Stuart
I'm not sure what you're speaking about? They never had a “doctrine” about this, but rather, the art department drew what appears to be a couple dinosaurs on the map. No words, no explanation, no doctrine. No “determined position” as you state.
Yes, I was being sarcastic…Stuart
Quote (david @ Jan. 25 2010,19:08) Quote Well if some JWs do claim this as a JW belief, then it needs to be treated as such. No, that doesn't make sense.
In the same time period, some scientists believed…..[you name it]
If you like, I can pick on all the things that fringe scientists believed in the 60's. But that wouldn't “prove” anything, would it? It would only prove that “some” scientists had their own ideas.I for example, can say that “I believe stu is….[whatever.]” It doesnt' mean that you can say “JW's believe….”
Quote Have you told me what year you think the flood took place yet? If I may assume it is since the earliest recorded history of the Jews, say well within the last 10,000 years, then of course the claim that dinosaurs died in the flood is a joke, because dinosaurs were all well and truly gone 65 million years ago, and there has been no global flood in the past 10,000 years. Stu, may I ask: What was the general scientific belief on this in the early 60's? You are stating what you believe now and comparing it to what “some” JW's believed years ago.
Some fringe scientists today and many pseudoscientists continue to believe that a plesiosaur lives in Loch Ness, even though no one has ever been able to find convincing proof. And until I hear from the science “committee” that there is no Nessy, I shall continue to believe that this is what scientists believe. Does this sound reasonable to you?
Regarding claims for belief, then if a JW says “JWs believe (Such and such)” then what should your reaction be? It is true that some JWs believe it in the name of their religion, so prima facie it IS a JW belief. If they are subsequently overruled and told that actually they do not believe it by a committee, then it would be up to them to agree, or schism, or something. The point is, who should you believe? Religious beliefs are taken on faith, there is no ultimate arbiter evident(!)By contrast, science comes to consensus with evidence determining the answers. Strictly, in the absence of evidence science has no position, and anyone with an understanding of that point should be able to tell the difference immediately. You would not say that abiogenesis by entrapment of unknown replicating molecules in micelles is 'science', because while there are scientists who believe in it, there is no consensus on the point and any scientist should if he is being honest say that it is not part of science, except to the extent that people are researching possibilities. Now if a scientist were to be dishonest and claim that this model was a sincerely held belief of the science community you would be able to spot the error straight away.
Religious doctrines belong in a different category…
…because they are fictions written in a book to which anyone could make additions or alterations without altering the essential character of the writing, and why would that not be legitimate, in the absence of an arbiter like evidence is for science.If Charles Taze Russell was still alive, I guess he would claim authorship of the book of JW fictions, but I am sure there would be JWs claiming he was not a real JW, as there are in any crackpot cult.
Stuart
Quote By contrast, science comes to consensus with evidence determining the answers. Strictly, in the absence of evidence science has no position, But SCIENTISTS have positions on things all the time that are not proved one way or the other. Still on the topic of dinosaurs, a recent documentary was explaining a heated debate over whether some skull was used for attack or for mating purposes. There is evidence pointing in both directions, and depending on their bias, they choose which to believe. You can say that “science” doesn't have a position on it, but the scientists sure do. And, that is my point with what some JW's believed in the 60's or whenever. It is the exact same thing. Some individual JW's can believe this while “JW's” officially have no position on it.
You said:
Quote Well if some JWs do claim this as a JW belief, then it needs to be treated as such But that is preposterous! FOR by the same logic, I can pick and choose individual scientists and “treat” it as such, as you say. BUT I KNOW YOU'VE CALLED THAT unfair when I do it. So why do you do it?
Because in the case of religious mythology there is no ultimate arbiter, whereas in science there is a clear and central means of resolving differences: empirical evidence. If the evidence is ambiguous then you need more evidence!
That is why the history of science is one of slow convergence and agreement, while that of religions is one of endless fracture and schism.
That is exactly the kind of result you would expect if the god those religious folk worshiped either doesn't care, or doesn't exist.
Stuart
Quote Because in the case of religious mythology there is no ultimate arbiter, whereas in science there is a clear and central means of resolving differences: empirical evidence. If the evidence is ambiguous then you need more evidence! right, so you're saying those scientists that clearly had positions on either side shouldn't have had positions and should have kept their ideas to themselves?
I think scientists often have positions (based on whatever evidence there is) and those positions are either shown to be true or false as much more evidence comes in.
I don't think you really believe that we should say “science” believes [whatever] just because “some” scientists do.
tHAT is my point. (and it holds true not just in science, but also with JW's.) That's all I'm saying. And I know you understand it, despite your now avoiding it.No, it should be clear where the line is between a scientist's personal speculation and his peer-reviewed published results. Usually I have no problem distinguishing the two.
The process of science indeed is to propose and then try and disprove, and if the proposals are broadcast for general consumption it might be a bit more difficult for non-scientists to tell the difference. That is why actually I think most of the time scientists do stay quiet until their work has been through formal channels.
I don't think I am avoiding anything. There is such a thing as the standard model, which is an accumulation of theories that together form a coherent and cross-disciplinary model of the universe that has survived much testing. You can certainly base a statement of 'science says…' around that, and I do thing that is what people mean when they make such a statement. If they are making individual speculations then most scientists make that clear, in my experience.
Stuart
Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 29 2010,12:22) Why is it that you don't say “in my experience” when you speak of God?
Indeed. What does that tell you?!I'll try such a statement:
In my experience there would appear to be as many gods believed in as there are believers, indicating that those gods do not exist outside of the craniums of the believers.Actually I think I have written that before.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 30 2010,08:13) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 29 2010,12:22) Why is it that you don't say “in my experience” when you speak of God?
Indeed. What does that tell you?!I'll try such a statement:
In my experience there would appear to be as many gods believed in as there are believers, indicating that those gods do not exist outside of the craniums of the believers.Actually I think I have written that before.
Stuart
How, is it we don'thave many laws of gravity?Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 30 2010,13:05) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 30 2010,08:13) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 29 2010,12:22) Why is it that you don't say “in my experience” when you speak of God?
Indeed. What does that tell you?!I'll try such a statement:
In my experience there would appear to be as many gods believed in as there are believers, indicating that those gods do not exist outside of the craniums of the believers.Actually I think I have written that before.
Stuart
How, is it we don'thave many laws of gravity?
Because we have not yet quantified the laws of gravity that relate to dark matter, dark energy and whatever else the universe might turn out to be made of, I guess.Of course they might all turn out to be unifiable. But that is a little way off…
What does the description of gravity have to do with all the multitudes of imagined gods?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 31 2010,01:32) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 30 2010,13:05) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 30 2010,08:13) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 29 2010,12:22) Why is it that you don't say “in my experience” when you speak of God?
Indeed. What does that tell you?!I'll try such a statement:
In my experience there would appear to be as many gods believed in as there are believers, indicating that those gods do not exist outside of the craniums of the believers.Actually I think I have written that before.
Stuart
How, is it we don'thave many laws of gravity?
Because we have not yet quantified the laws of gravity that relate to dark matter, dark energy and whatever else the universe might turn out to be made of, I guess.Of course they might all turn out to be unifiable. But that is a little way off…
What does the description of gravity have to do with all the multitudes of imagined gods?
Stuart
STUThe universe would be in chaos if there were many gods
The particle world is, more than anything described by the word chaos. Does that mean that everything sub-microscopic is governed by many gods?
Stuart
If you look at anything it can appear chaotic. But chaos that is confined within a border of design is design too. e.g., a snooker table on a boat might force the balls on the table to move about chaotically, but the design around it is very much order. Not all things need to be ordered. You can have chaos within it as order is not necessary and is overkill for all things.
Another example is a poker machine. When you pull the handle you might get a random row of numbers and symbols, but it would be lack of understanding to say that this demonstrates that there is no creator or design of the system that produces those numbers and symbols.
Hang on, this is about dinosaurs.
I saw a Tuatara the other day.
And I saw a Takahe. Apparently birds came from dinosaurs.
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 01 2010,23:35) If you look at anything it can appear chaotic. But chaos that is confined within a border of design is design too. e.g., a snooker table on a boat might force the balls on the table to move about chaotically, but the design around it is very much order. Not all things need to be ordered. You can have chaos within it as order is not necessary and is overkill for all things. Another example is a poker machine. When you pull the handle you might get a random row of numbers and symbols, but it would be lack of understanding to say that this demonstrates that there is no creator or design of the system that produces those numbers and symbols.
Great Post!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
