It's been a while :-)

[**bustysinclaire**]

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-no1-2018-jan-feb/bible-guidance-relevant/

A topic that is being offered for discussion this month. Some may find it interesting xxx

[upthecreekyetagain]

The day someone creates life from inanimate elements will be the day these arguments are put to bed.

[**bustysinclaire**]

There is plenty of evidence of transitional changes

https://www.livescience.com/3306-fossils-reveal-truth-darwin-theory.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-fossil-fal

I have read those before, they certainly dont prove evolution, all it tells us is that certain remains of indidual animals have been found. Several different kinds of dog, manatees, geraffe etc. There is no proof off transition.

There is however a clear explanation in the bible, God created each animal of its own kind.

It is certainly not disputed that fossils are real either.

Anyway   we don’t just have to rely on fossils.  More modern scientific disciplines like genetics and molecular biology provide strong evidence.

“We know evolution happened not because of transitional fossils such as A. natans but because of the convergence of evidence from such diverse fields as geology, paleontology, biogeography, comparative anatomy and physiology, molecular biology, genetics, and many more.  No single discovery from any of these fields denotes proof of evolution, but together they reveal that life evolved in a certain sequence by a particular process.”

Thankfully I understand genetics myself, and it does't and can't prove eveolution becauss it is impossible to get something living from something non living.

So, BS,  do you think that God put fossils in the rocks and the vestigial remains of evolution in various organisms just for a laugh to confuse us?  I would have thought that your all-knowing all-powerful god would have better things to do than waste his time on contemptuous trivial pursuits and silly jokes.

As I have said susie, Jw's are not creationist, We do believe God tyo be the creator though, the existance of fossils has never been denied, the dinasaus have never been denied either for that matter, they were just never mentionedin the bible, probably because there wasnt any need.

I don’t see that Pope Francis acceptance of some scientific discoveries and theories makes him a hypocrite; far from it. Many religions don’t see that a belief in God and evolution are at odds, they don’t have a problem with some texts in the bible being a metaphor, and they don’t have a problem with adapting their faith to incorporate knowledge about the world.

Not a hypocrte?? Really? To deny that God is the creator,  while he claims to be the  holy father and the bible as Gods word. MMMMMMM 

 It seems to me that it is only some fundamentalists and evangelists who are immovable that take man’s writings that made up the bible literally, and even they choose to ignore some texts.

True christians ignore nothing of the bible.

The daftest IMO are those who think that God created the earth within 6000-10000 years ago, such as the Young Earth Creationists, but it’s not just them.  I was appalled to read that apparently 40% of Americans believe this – i.e. that the earth is younger than the time that has passed since humans domesticated the dog!  But then only 3 out of 4 Americans know that the earth revolves around the sun and not vice versa, in spite of overwhelming evidence that the sun is at the centre of our little suburban solar system on an outer arm of an average galaxy.   How can people be so ignorant when there is so much information available to those who are curious about the wonders of the world around us and the solar system and universe?

As I have said before JW's are NOT creationalist, wE do not follow the belief that God created the earth In 6,000 literal years.

We are in awe of our marvelous universe and the wonders of the world. But to answer you question how can people be so ignorant, I will say, in exactly the same way as others can be so ignorant when there is so much information available to everyone concerning the correct explanation of how life began ond how this wonderous planet of ours came to be in existance.

And what about JWs, BS, can you not accommodate the fact that humans have learnt a great deal about the world in the last 1500-2000 years?  The men who wrote and who read the scriptures all those centuries ago weren’t fortunate enough to know what we know today and lived in a very different world where many things could not be explained rationally.  Do JWs believe that all the knowledge we have acquired over the last 2 millennia and the great discoveries that we will make in the future are pointless/worthless and should be ignored in favour of believing in cherry-picked ancient writings by those who knew no different?  That seems to me to make the extraordinary capabilities of the human mind and the life’s work of people like Einstein and Hawking and other great scientists rather redundant.  That i could never believe.   

Susie, we were given a fantastic thing called a brain and we were most definately supposed to use it, to learn and progress, and there have been some remarkably clever men and women through the ages that without mankind wouldnt bewhere we are today.  All that is expected of us though is to appreciate the giver of life and recognise his soverienty.

I see no reason why religion cannot adapt and move with the times.  To survive and be relevant today it will probably need to. Who says it can’t? Those who won’t think for themselves, choose not to, or fear fictional repercussions of independent thought?

I can understand why you would aske that susie, but the point is according to what we believe in the bible we have to Give credit for everything we have to God and live by his standards, it is only through him we can survive. We do think for ourselves,w e havent come to the conclusions we have with out research and thought, w d have taken all information available and reasoned on it.  It isnt a blind faith.

No-one can prove absolutely that God exists, or doesn’t exist (so far). From my posts it’s obvious that I am not a believer in a supernatural personal God.  I see no reason why “he” should have any interest in me since I am just a part of the animal kingdom that has evolved on earth and am lucky enough to have the experience for a few decades.  I’m glad that my curiosity about the amazing world we live in gave me an interest in science and biology for a career and has spurred me to read some fascinating books by popular science writers like Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, Matt Ridley, Steve Jones etc. I feel that seeking knowledge has enriched my life more than blind unquestioning faith would have.

I try to live a decent life and some Christian principles make a lot of ethical sense for humans to get on with each other, although sadly it is religion and peoples’ inflexibility and blind intolerance that cause so many conflicts in the world.   

You are wrong in HIM having no interest in you, he is interested in every single person, he just alllows us al our choices. Science is wonderfull, it is actually backing up creation far more now than it ever has done as we learn of the wonders around us. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking knowlege, but it can work alongside a faith in God,for anyone who wants or lets it.

I would think most people on this board are decent people susie xxx and I certainly agree that religion ha s got a lot to answer for for the state of this world and its conficts.  But we shouldnt be blaming God.  It is down to the wicked element in some of mankind doing all that isbad in the name of God.

[#4]

https://www.livescience.com/3306-fossils-reveal-truth-darwin-theory.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-fossil-fal

I have read those before, they certainly dont prove evolution, all it tells us is that certain remains of indidual animals have been found. Several different kinds of dog, manatees, geraffe etc. There is no proof off transition.

There is however a clear explanation in the bible, God created each animal of its own kind.

It is certainly not disputed that fossils are real either.

Anyway   we don’t just have to rely on fossils.  More modern scientific disciplines like genetics and molecular biology provide strong evidence.

“We know evolution happened not because of transitional fossils such as A. natans but because of the convergence of evidence from such diverse fields as geology, paleontology, biogeography, comparative anatomy and physiology, molecular biology, genetics, and many more.  No single discovery from any of these fields denotes proof of evolution, but together they reveal that life evolved in a certain sequence by a particular process.”

Thankfully I understand genetics myself, and it does't and can't prove eveolution becauss it is impossible to get something living from something non living.

So, BS,  do you think that God put fossils in the rocks and the vestigial remains of evolution in various organisms just for a laugh to confuse us?  I would have thought that your all-knowing all-powerful god would have better things to do than waste his time on contemptuous trivial pursuits and silly jokes.

As I have said susie, Jw's are not creationist, We do believe God tyo be the creator though, the existance of fossils has never been denied, the dinasaus have never been denied either for that matter, they were just never mentionedin the bible, probably because there wasnt any need.

I don’t see that Pope Francis acceptance of some scientific discoveries and theories makes him a hypocrite; far from it. Many religions don’t see that a belief in God and evolution are at odds, they don’t have a problem with some texts in the bible being a metaphor, and they don’t have a problem with adapting their faith to incorporate knowledge about the world.

Not a hypocrte?? Really? To deny that God is the creator,  while he claims to be the  holy father and the bible as Gods word. MMMMMMM 

 It seems to me that it is only some fundamentalists and evangelists who are immovable that take man’s writings that made up the bible literally, and even they choose to ignore some texts.

True christians ignore nothing of the bible.

The daftest IMO are those who think that God created the earth within 6000-10000 years ago, such as the Young Earth Creationists, but it’s not just them.  I was appalled to read that apparently 40% of Americans believe this – i.e. that the earth is younger than the time that has passed since humans domesticated the dog!  But then only 3 out of 4 Americans know that the earth revolves around the sun and not vice versa, in spite of overwhelming evidence that the sun is at the centre of our little suburban solar system on an outer arm of an average galaxy.   How can people be so ignorant when there is so much information available to those who are curious about the wonders of the world around us and the solar system and universe?

As I have said before JW's are NOT creationalist, wE do not follow the belief that God created the earth In 6,000 literal years.

We are in awe of our marvelous universe and the wonders of the world. But to answer you question how can people be so ignorant, I will say, in exactly the same way as others can be so ignorant when there is so much information available to everyone concerning the correct explanation of how life began ond how this wonderous planet of ours came to be in existance.

And what about JWs, BS, can you not accommodate the fact that humans have learnt a great deal about the world in the last 1500-2000 years?  The men who wrote and who read the scriptures all those centuries ago weren’t fortunate enough to know what we know today and lived in a very different world where many things could not be explained rationally.  Do JWs believe that all the knowledge we have acquired over the last 2 millennia and the great discoveries that we will make in the future are pointless/worthless and should be ignored in favour of believing in cherry-picked ancient writings by those who knew no different?  That seems to me to make the extraordinary capabilities of the human mind and the life’s work of people like Einstein and Hawking and other great scientists rather redundant.  That i could never believe.   

Susie, we were given a fantastic thing called a brain and we were most definately supposed to use it, to learn and progress, and there have been some remarkably clever men and women through the ages that without mankind wouldnt bewhere we are today.  All that is expected of us though is to appreciate the giver of life and recognise his soverienty.

I see no reason why religion cannot adapt and move with the times.  To survive and be relevant today it will probably need to. Who says it can’t? Those who won’t think for themselves, choose not to, or fear fictional repercussions of independent thought?

I can understand why you would aske that susie, but the point is according to what we believe in the bible we have to Give credit for everything we have to God and live by his standards, it is only through him we can survive. We do think for ourselves,w e havent come to the conclusions we have with out research and thought, w d have taken all information available and reasoned on it.  It isnt a blind faith.

No-one can prove absolutely that God exists, or doesn’t exist (so far). From my posts it’s obvious that I am not a believer in a supernatural personal God.  I see no reason why “he” should have any interest in me since I am just a part of the animal kingdom that has evolved on earth and am lucky enough to have the experience for a few decades.  I’m glad that my curiosity about the amazing world we live in gave me an interest in science and biology for a career and has spurred me to read some fascinating books by popular science writers like Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, Matt Ridley, Steve Jones etc. I feel that seeking knowledge has enriched my life more than blind unquestioning faith would have.

I try to live a decent life and some Christian principles make a lot of ethical sense for humans to get on with each other, although sadly it is religion and peoples’ inflexibility and blind intolerance that cause so many conflicts in the world.   

You are wrong in HIM having no interest in you, he is interested in every single person, he just alllows us al our choices. Science is wonderfull, it is actually backing up creation far more now than it ever has done as we learn of the wonders around us. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking knowlege, but it can work alongside a faith in God,for anyone who wants or lets it.

I would think most people on this board are decent people susie xxx and I certainly agree that religion ha s got a lot to answer for for the state of this world and its conficts.  But we shouldnt be blaming God.  It is down to the wicked element in some of mankind doing all that isbad in the name of God.

[cee-dee]

Dear oh dear, it's getting worse. Fancy being given a perfectly good brain and allowing it to be addled by such nonsense?

Same old "We believe in the Bible". How can you believe in it when the cotradictions are there before you? Ah, it's that selective thing again. Pick and choose, cherry-pick?

So, we have "In the beginnig, god created the heavens and the earth" and then we have "In the beginning was the word"........... There's a simple contradiction?

Now what convinces you that your god is male? Also, you can't believe your god is the creator if you don't accept that we, along with other things evolved.

Now how would people from the days of the Bible have explained the existence of the dinosaurs and the other fossilised creatures? "There wasn't any need?" You mean they hadn't found any or they would have been explained away somehow?

You're wrong about getting something from something non-living. The one thing you CAN get from something not living is DNA. You can't get it from a fossil because the DNA is gone. OK, so you said it was impossible to get something "living" from something non-living but DNA can prove how things evolved if you can find enough specimens.

[**bustysinclaire**]

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201501/how-life-began/

[**bustysinclaire**]

Susie xxx

Please don't assume we know  nothing. We have an ubundant amount of fantastic information, facts and knowlege at our fingertips collected from numerous sources. We just choose  to come to diferent conclusions.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/was-life-created/the-living-planet/

[**bustysinclaire**]

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/was-life-created/evolution-myths-and-facts/

 Put this link up because it makes interesting reading concerning evolution.

if I copy and paste or rewrite it would make it far too long.

[suzieseaside]

BS, you said: Not a hypocrte?? Really? To deny that God is the creator,  while he claims to be the  holy father and the bible as Gods word. MMMMMMM 

Before you shout down the Pope ......He did NOT deny that God is the creator.  You have not read what he said correctly.  He said that both scientific theories (Big Bang and Evolution) were not incompatible with the existence of a creator

Here’s the original comment in context, which makes it clear he neither said nor meant that God was less than Divine:

"God is not a demiurge or a conjurer, but the Creator who gives being to all things. The beginning of the world is not the work of chaos that owes its origin to another, but derives directly from a supreme Origin that creates out of love. The Big Bang, which nowadays is posited as the origin of the world, does not contradict the divine act of creating, but rather requires it. The evolution of nature does not contrast with the notion of Creation, as evolution presupposes the creation of beings that evolve."

You said: Thankfully I understand genetics myself, and it does't and can't prove eveolution becauss it is impossible to get something living from something non living.

But do you understand what eolution means? As the Pope knows, evolution does NOT mean getting something living from something that isn’t, so your understanding of what evolution means is flawed. First you need life to begin before it evolves.  The mechanism  for natural selection exists, without any doubt, and evolution continues . 

In other places you have not read what I said, but have assumed I have been referring to JWs when I have not . 

You say:  As I have said before JW's are NOT creationalist wE do not follow the belief that God created the earth In 6,000 literal years.

Nowhere did I say that JWs believe either that the earth was created IN 6000 years, or that they believe the earth is less than 6000-10000 years old. I mentioned an example of another religious group who do believe this, and many Americans, but I did not mention JWs.

But while we are on the number 6000, am I right in thinking that JWs believe that humans, via Adam and then Eve, only came into being around 4000 years BC and that they have an allotted span of about 6000 years earthly existence before Armageddon? I gather that this was to occur during the lifetime of people alive in 1914, but since the deadline of the failed prophecies has passed and nothing happened in 1975, the prophecy has been amended to ‘soon’?

So much for the earliest known fossil Homo sapiens found recently that was dated as being 300,000 years old, using 2 different dating methods, 100,000 years older than previously discovered  remains of H.sapiens, of which many exist between 100,000 and 200,00 years old.  A long way off that 6000 years for Adam and Eve, but I suppose that JWs don’t believe the validity of scientific dating methods either? Or are these fossil remains another wheeze planted by God?  

With regard to JWs ‘not being creationists’, perhaps you can give me your / Jehovah’s Witness definition of what a creationist is, if it does not mean a rejection of evolution – something I thought that you do not believe in.

This definition is what I think it means to be a creationist : Creationists are those who reject modern scientific theories and laws, especially evolution, over their old religious doctrines which they happen to be loyal to.

You said: I certainly agree that religion ha s got a lot to answer for for the state of this world and its conficts.  But we shouldnt be blaming God. 

Who is blaming God?  I didn’t say that.  It’s people who are the problem, who create conflict in the name of religion.  Pretty much what you have agreed

You said: True christians ignore nothing of the bible

What, no alterations or distortions in the New World Translation?  That’s a whole can of worms that I have no inclination to get in to.  Each to our own beliefs and interpretations about what and why the founders of the JWs selected and discarded from ancient biblical texts.

[upthecreekyetagain]

Interesting link and well worth a read.  Makes some very good points although a little too definitive in its tone for my liking.

This is also a good article and explains from the evolutionary point of view some of the difficulties in answering the points raised in the article you linked to - namely that we are only just beginning to understand the ‘how’ of evolutionary changes.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151217151645.htm

[suzieseaside]

---

@**bustysinclaire**wrote:

Susie xxx

Please don't assume we know  nothing. We have an ubundant amount of fantastic information, facts and knowlege at our fingertips collected from numerous sources. We just choose  to come to diferent conclusions.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/was-life-created/the-living-planet/

---

I don't assume that JWs know nothing, and it is clear that you read and study a lot of the information from JW.org.

Yes we come to different conclusions and that's fine.

What I don't understand about JWs, as I mentioned in my last post (and assuming what I have read about JW is correct) is how you can believe that humans started with Adam and Eve and that was only 6000 years ago, when fossil dating (from various methods) shows modern humans (Homo sapiens) to be very much older?

Then, what happened after A&E? Did God create lots of other humans to provide genetic diversity? Or do JWs believe that we all descend from Adam and Eve? If so there was a lot of incest going on between their progeny -something I thought the Bible deemed as a sin.

Sorry if Adam and Eve have been discussed earlier, I haven't gone back through all the pages of this thread recently.  I'll have a look later.

[cee-dee]

Yes, A & E and incest with their supposed offspring has been mentioned, but discussed? Not really. Lots of cult rants and beliefs but no real logical discussion. Have a look at #30 ?

Better than that, start at the beginning of the thread, have a good read and see just how much has not been responded to (or explained away) by the OP. See how much propaganda there is from the cult too?

[suzieseaside]

Thanks, I have read most of it over the weeks but have missed some

*rolls up sleeves, opens a can and prepares for a long read!*

[cee-dee]

I shall await your comments afterwards with interest. Enjoy.

[**bustysinclaire**]

BS, you said: Not a hypocrte?? Really? To deny that God is the creator,  while he claims to be the  holy father and the bible as Gods word. MMMMMMM 

Before you shout down the Pope ......He did NOT deny that God is the creator.  You have not read what he said correctly.  He said that both scientific theories (Big Bang and Evolution) were not incompatible with the existence of a creator

Here’s the original comment in context, which makes it clear he neither said nor meant that God was less than Divine:

"God is not a demiurge or a conjurer, but the Creator who gives being to all things. The beginning of the world is not the work of chaos that owes its origin to another, but derives directly from a supreme Origin that creates out of love. The Big Bang, which nowadays is posited as the origin of the world, does not contradict the divine act of creating, but rather requires it. The evolution of nature does not contrast with the notion of Creation, as evolution presupposes the creation of beings that evolve."

Thank you for that clarification Susie, I take your point about him not denying Gods existance. To be honest I hadn't seen that passage before you quoted it in full, but I have to say my view of him for other reasons don't really change.

 You said: Thankfully I understand genetics myself, and it does't and can't prove eveolution becauss it is impossible to get something living from something non living.

But do you understand what eolution means? As the Pope knows, evolution does NOT mean getting something living from something that isn’t, so your understanding of what evolution means is flawed. First you need life to begin before it evolves.  The mechanism  for natural selection exists, without any doubt, and evolution continues . 

Yes, I do believe I do susie,  but when some use the term  to explain how life began they are bringing in the arguments that life just happened and use genetics to back up their claims. As I do understand genetics that is why I feel confident enough to know that the certain claims regarding animals and man ie, fish into amphibians and apes into man.  

I have never myself denied that there can be subtle changes and variations within species.

In other places you have not read what I said, but have assumed I have been referring to JWs when I have not . 

You say:  As I have said before JW's are NOT creationalist wE do not follow the belief that God created the earth In 6,000 literal years.

Nowhere did I say that JWs believe either that the earth was created IN 6000 years, or that they believe the earth is less than 6000-10000 years old. I mentioned an example of another religious group who do believe this, and many Americans, but I did not mention JWs.

My apologies for that bit of a misunderstanding, I did read what you said and didn't take it that way, I was just pointing out that we aren't creationists, that it is them that believes the literal 6,000 years. There are many differences in their beilefs and ours.

But while we are on the number 6000, am I right in thinking that JWs believe that humans, via Adam and then Eve, only came into being around 4000 years BC and that they have an allotted span of about 6000 years earthly existence before Armageddon? I gather that this was to occur during the lifetime of people alive in 1914, but since the deadline of the failed prophecies has passed and nothing happened in 1975, the prophecy has been amended to ‘soon’?

Susie, I do have to admit I need to clarify for myself the time span of when Adam and Eves begining, dates etc and ill get back to you. As for Armegedon we are not given specific dates, the bible says only God knows the specific times. We are given certain signs to watch out for.  Without going in to too much, we believe that time is not far off. As for the year 1914 that was the time that we were told in the bible when Jesus would take his rightfull place as head of Gods heavenly government. That time was also prophesied in the bible, if you do want to know how we get to that conclusion this link will explain.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/daniels-prophecy-70-weeks-messiah/#?insight[sea...

So much for the earliest known fossil Homo sapiens found recently that was dated as being 300,000 years old, using 2 different dating methods, 100,000 years older than previously discovered  remains of H.sapiens, of which many exist between 100,000 and 200,00 years old.  A long way off that 6000 years for Adam and Eve, but I suppose that JWs don’t believe the validity of scientific dating methods either? Or are these fossil remains another wheeze planted by God?  

As I have said, fossils are not denied,  please dont mock susie, Im sure there are perfectly reasonable explanatins, I will have to check that one for you 

With regard to JWs ‘not being creationists’, perhaps you can give me your / Jehovah’s Witness definition of what a creationist is, if it does not mean a rejection of evolution – something I thought that you do not believe in.

This definition is what I think it means to be a creationist : Creationists are those who reject modern scientific theories and laws, especially evolution, over their old religious doctrines which they happen to be loyal to.

There is a specific group/religion called Creationists like we take the name Jehovahs Witnesses, and I would say your definition describes them well. Jw's do yes believe in God as creator and yes we reject evolution but we do not reject science as a whole. 

You said: I certainly agree that religion ha s got a lot to answer for for the state of this world and its conficts.  But we shouldnt be blaming God. 

Who is blaming God?  I didn’t say that.  It’s people who are the problem, who create conflict in the name of religion.  Pretty much what you have agreed

You said: True christians ignore nothing of the bible

What, no alterations or distortions in the New World Translation?  That’s a whole can of worms that I have no inclination to get in to.  Each to our own beliefs and interpretations about what and why the founders of the JWs selected and discarded from ancient biblical texts.

This is where, trying to explain an convince people that our religion is not the same as all the others. I can understand why we are put in the same group as all the others, but we would argue that our faith is the one that keeps Gods laws without picking and choosing,  without alterations and distortions. As you say susie each to our own beliefs.  What I would like to correct you on though, the founder of the faith was/is God. Xx

[**bustysinclaire**]

Interesting link creeky thank you, I did read it. Xx

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@suzieseasidewrote:

---

@**bustysinclaire**wrote:

Susie xxx

Please don't assume we know  nothing. We have an ubundant amount of fantastic information, facts and knowlege at our fingertips collected from numerous sources. We just choose  to come to diferent conclusions.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/was-life-created/the-living-planet/

---

I don't assume that JWs know nothing, and it is clear that you read and study a lot of the information from JW.org.

Yes we come to different conclusions and that's fine.

What I don't understand about JWs, as I mentioned in my last post (and assuming what I have read about JW is correct) is how you can believe that humans started with Adam and Eve and that was only 6000 years ago, when fossil dating (from various methods) shows modern humans (Homo sapiens) to be very much older?

Then, what happened after A&E? Did God create lots of other humans to provide genetic diversity? Or do JWs believe that we all descend from Adam and Eve? If so there was a lot of incest going on between their progeny -something I thought the Bible deemed as a sin.

Sorry if Adam and Eve have been discussed earlier, I haven't gone back through all the pages of this thread recently.  I'll have a look later.

---

If God had created others then the theme .of the bible would be very different surely?

There is no teaching that God created others. The whole of mankind came from just one couple.

Adam and eve were created and given the command to go and reproduce to fill the earth. That cammand was never changed even though the sinned and would then eventually grow old and die because of it. So it was adam and eve who had children and there children had children and so on. Gods laws of not marrying close family members and brothers and sisters wasnt made intill much later. While there was only a few generations (im really not sure myself of timespans on this I will have to check) they were so much closer to perfection so what you would call interbreeding would not produce the health and body defects like they do now.

[cee-dee]

Well now, I did what I suggested you do and I read the whole thread again from start to now.

What has shone through is that BS believes and has faith in a cobbled together collection of ancient stories which have been collated by unknown writers who've claimed that their collection of selective stories are the word of some all-powerful male being who is the creator of everything.

Also, attempts to discuss the practicality of things at "the beginning" or before, during and after the new beginning of "the flood" have been completely ignored.

The conclusion seems to be that all the inexplicables are "explained" away by the claim that "it's the work/word of god".

Also, I see that the OP dosn't seem to know what "the last word" is? Stange that?

[**bustysinclaire**]

Susie, I said I would get back to you on the timespan.

I can confirm that Adam and Eve were created in the year 

4026BCE

This link maybe useful     https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200000089

Also these too are interesting. If you want to read anything else.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g200609/An-Interview-With-a-Biochemist/

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g200609/Is-Evolution-a-Fact/#?insight[search_id]=e8f69d...

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g200609/Watching-the-World/

[margaret*e]

Evening BS.

We had a visit from some JWs today.

They left a leaflet asking people to visit Kingdom Hall on the 31st March.

 I didn't think non JWs were allowed so I was surprised.

[cee-dee]

Who came up with that ridiculous suggestion?

If A & E were the first humans...... where does that leave the remains of ancient people hundreds of thousands of years old?

[**bustysinclaire**]

Hi margaret,

That has never been the case, anyone is welcome.  Xxx

Your recent visit with invation is actually being made worldwide.  A marvelous accomplishment when you think what organising that would take. Xx