Sean Carroll and the Den Yers
Earning Everlasting Life

Epochs and Aeons

Tack as many zeroes as you want onto Earth's age. Jehovah's Witnesses have no issue with it. A billion years? Ten billion? One hundred billion? More? Not a problem. That's not to say we endorse it, necessarily. But we'll have no issue with it. Let scientists be scientists.

“In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” reads the Bible's first verse. This is before the series of creative days commence, that period during which the earth fills with life. Whether each of those days are 24 hours in length, or 24 millenia, or 24 seconds.....it make no difference to the age of “the heavens and the earth.” They were created before.

However, as to the days themselves, what say Jehovah's Witnesses as to that? Even many JWs themselves may not be up to speed, for it was once thought that each day lasted 7000 years...it seemed to fit some prophetic patterns. But that view has been abandoned. (A flip-flop!! I can hear Tom Barfendogs screaming now.)

Now, however, each day is described as an “epoch.” And the sum total of them: "aeons":

From the Watchtower of Feb 15, 2011 pp 8-9)

“The Bible goes on to describe what God did during a series of creative days. These are not 24 hour days but are epochs…....By means of his holy spirit, during creative days three through six, God created an astounding variety of plants and animals. …....After aeons had passed and God had produced innumerable animate and inanimate works, the earth was no longer “formless and waste.”

This revision of “day” stems from recognition that the Hebrew word need not refer to only the 24 hour variety. Even on the first creative “day,” “God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night,” apparently as the thick clouds enshrouding the earth began to clear, allowing sunlight to reach the surface. So the entire period is a “day,” and also a portion of it is a “day!” Furthermore, after all six creative days are described, the Genesis account refers to all of it as a “day':

This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.    Gen 2:4

Okay? “Day” need not be 24 hours. It can be simply an non specific period of time. Even in English, we've all suffered old-timers carrying on about life “back in my day.” And if scripture doesn't insist otherwise, why squabble when scientists put forth numbers on life's development? We're not anti-science. Science is a powerful tool of discovery. We've nothing against it. To be sure, we don't see it as the be-all and end-all, and when scientists say “jump!” we don't instantly respond “how high?” But we're willing to acquiesce where there's no Biblical conflict. And in the matter of “days”, there is none. Far from being rigid (a frequent criticism), the Witness stand allows for incorporating findings of science.

So it appears with this piece that I might conclude my Sean B Carroll trilogy, the prior two installments of which are here and here. His book impressed me....a book from an evolutionist published post genome mapping. I wonder if our stand on Genesis is good enough for him. Probably not, for he appears to want no trace of God in any evolutionary goings on, whereas we've said  (above) “by means of his holy spirit, during creative days three through six, God created an astounding variety of plants and animals.” But when Sean is muttering about the denyers....yes, yes, I know its a misspelling, but he apparently does it for the silly reasons given here, and I am this close to being equally silly and calling the other guys evolootionists....you know....'loo', the British term for toilet......but I just can't make myself be that juvenile, at least not yet. At any rate, Sean laments the denyers are “those straitjacketed by biblically based interpretations of the age of the Earth.” Like most everyone else, he takes for granted that fundamentalists truly represent the Bible....an assumption that burns me up to no end.

Of course, we're not that way. Straitjacketed, I mean. We're not 24 hour people. We've no problem with epochs and aeons. Ought that not make Sean happy?

Now, it occurs to me that if the Biblical days are as long as scientists say they are, well....that allows plenty of time for the evolutionary goings on that Sean Carroll talks about to go on....with the consequence that evolution, in the main, is a battle that we need not fight. Not that we have to endorse it. But much like the age of the “heavens and the earth,” we need not take much exception to it. As that Feb 2011 Watchtower states, “by means of his holy spirit, during creative days three through six, God created an astounding variety of plants and animals.” That's not very specific as to method, is it? Might the method through which holy spirit delivers be the one scientists describe? Dunno if that is the case, or to what extent, but I do know that if God molded each “kind” like a potter molding clay on a potter's wheel....well.....he could do that in a literal 24 hour day. So what's the point of the epochs and aeons? Frankly, life programmed to adapt via accumulation of genetic change strikes me as no less miraculous than potter-created life.

No one's being dogmatic, here. Science is accommodated to the maximum extent without ignoring Scripture, which we ultimately consider the most reliable guide to life. The 2010 brochure Was Life Created? states: (page 27) ImagesCAVUV1FW Were these original “kinds” of plants and animals programmed with the ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions? What defines the boundary of a “kind”? The Bible does not say. However, it does state that living creatures “swarmed forth according to their kinds.” (Genesis 1:21) This statement implies that there is a limit to the amount of variation that can occur within a “kind.” [bolded print mine] Thus, our current view allows for what's described as micro-evolution (within a “kind”) but not macro-evolution (outside of a kind). But “implies” is not an ironclad word, is it? The point is, for the Christian, if the time element for developing life is indeed epochs and aeons, you need not squabble much with scientists who describe it. Let scientists be scientists. We'll teach the Bible.

What about this statement immediately preceding the lines quoted above: Does this progressive appearance of plants and animals imply that God used evolution to produce the vast diversity of living things? No. The record clearly states that God created all the basic “kinds” of plant and animal life. (Genesis 1:11, 12, 20-25) “Evolution”, as Sean Carroll and others like to describe it, strictly excludes all hints of “programming,” and they positively choke on any mention of “holy spirit.” But if you go and retrieve those words from the dumpster into which they've been tossed, you'll do just fine. For today we recognize a strong (and unnecessary) anti-God element among the evolutionists. From the same brochure (Was Life Created?  page 22):

Why do many prominent evolutionists insist that macroevolution is a fact? Richard Lewontin, an influential evolutionist, candidly wrote that many scientists are willing to accept unproven scientific claims because they “have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Many scientists refuse even to consider the possibility of an intelligent Designer because, as Lewontin writes, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

 In this regard, sociologist Rodney Stark is quoted in Scientific American as saying: “There’s been 200 years of marketing that if you want to be a scientific person you’ve got to keep your mind free of the fetters of religion.” He further notes that in research universities, “the religious people keep their mouths shut.”  

Now, I admit, I'm a bit fearful of using these quotes lest grousers suppose I'm implying that the above fellows reject evolution. They don't. “Quote mining” is the charge grousers may level, and who wants to be guilty of that? But I've already dealt with the subject here. I don't know what else I can do. You should never play the God/no-God game with atheists according to their rules, since their primary rule is that you can't move any of your pieces.

But with the acceptance of epochs and aeons, vast areas of conflict between the science camp and the JW camp vanish, and others become largely immaterial. Not all, to be sure. The creation of Adam remains a topic on which I don't yet see grounds for agreement. From that same Feb 15th Watchtower: “Yet, Jehovah had not finished using his spirit for creative purposes. He was about to produce his highest earthly creation. Toward the end of the sixth creative day, God created man. How did Jehovah do so? By using his holy spirit and the elements of the earth.”

Yet if the Watchtower has taken to interviewing guys like Michael Behe, who accepts evolution in the main, but acknowledges it has limits, well.....I mean.....they wouldn't do that if the two hated each others' guts. Our people are not being dogmatic here. They recognize where other views can be accommodated, and are not so presumptuous as to try to instruct scientists on their own turf.

I thought I might be the first to blog such a subject, but no! When googled 'Michael Behe' and 'Awake interview', I find there is a discussion some time ago on “is the Watchtower preparing to accept evolution?” I suppose I should link to it, but I'm not going to. It's a sorehead grouser site, largely populated by those who've abandoned spiritual things upon discovery that God is not Santa Claus....that he does more than just give us stuff, that he has requirements, that the Christian course involves sacrifice and self-discipline, and is not just opening presents, and....gasp!....it involves human organization, which may sometimes decide matters contrary to one's individual preference!.....a violation of freedom and independence!!!! These type of guys exasperate me. Find them yourselves if you must.

Plus, they view any such adjustment in JW viewpoint as a slick marketing ploy. For me any modification of view stems from recent scientific ability to read the genome....to grow fast-reproducing goo and slime, and to track each and every gene involved and spot which ones have reproduced faithfully and which ones have not and what are the accumulated effects of those that did not. It's a major tangible advance for science, and while fundamentalists might ignore it, we don't.

Well, if you were impressed with Sean Carroll's book so much, Mr Sheepandgoats, then why don't you let him dictate everything to you....he makes no allowance for programming or God or holy spirit. The answer is that I've chosen the Christian course represented by Jehovah's Witnesses based upon several lines of reason, present scientific opinion being but one of them.

In the main, it becomes apparent that the greater conflict is not between the Bible (and us) and science. It's between the fundamentalists and science. These religious characters do the same with “day” that they do with trinity and hellfire. They take words and phrases literally....words which in any other context they would instantly recognize as metaphor. If they read of someone shedding “crocodile tears” in a novel, they know exactly what that expression means. If they read it in the Bible, they take it as PROOF that the shedder is a crocodile, since the Bible MEANS what is SAYS and SAYS what it MEANS. They exasperate me to no end, since they make the Bible an object of ridicule to anyone deciding to use the brain God gave us.

 

[edit: 1/20/2012,  see interview between New Republic's John McWhorter and Michael Behe. Sean Carroll & his work comes in for mention, around the 11-12, 22-24 minute marks. He's a nice guy, Behe says.]

******************************************

 

Tom Irregardless and Me                     No Fake News but Plenty of Hogwash

Defending Jehovah’s Witnesses with style from attacks... in Russia, with the ebook ‘Dear Mr. Putin - Jehovah’s Witnesses Write Russia’ (free).... and in the West, with the ebook ‘TrueTom vs the Apostates!’ (free)

Comments

Nick

It's a common reason (excuse) from the people we sometimes meet in the ministry, on why they reject the Bible or at least the Genesis account of creation, because they "don't accept that the world was created in just six days...". Well, at least that gives us the opportunity to explain what the Bible really teaches on that point and offer the "Was Life Created?" brochure.

Regarding creation, see Novembers Awake!

As it's relevant to this article, check out this book I have on pre-order

Seven Days That Divide the World
The Beginning According to Genesis and Science
http://amzn.to/mOMB0W

Should be good, I hope.

His (John Lennox) last book I read, "God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design is it Anyway?" was excellent imo, even though it's only 96 pages he gives a decent rebuttal to the arguments & assertions in Hawking's recent book "The Grand Design".

"What this all goes to show is that nonsense remains nonsense, even when talked by world-famous scientists." - John C. Lennox.

TC

Time , what an interesting and misunderstood subject . Space/Time as Albert would have it .

Our own Galaxy turns once , it is called a Galactic year , ..... If we measured Time in THAT time frame , as 1 year Your lifespan would be about 7 seconds ( Take a deep breath , ok your dead) But that is just referencing our own Galaxy , out of how many billions of Galaxies ???

If we take into consideration That Time is measured on a different scale than We measly , worthless , arrogant , self assertive Humans would have it . Then we easily see that the Bible is in COMPLETE AGREEMENT with Science

God who has the privilege , of measuring time however he feels like . ( Maybe Jupiters Orbit is the HOUR , or Minute who knows )

But the Fact is The Universe is old , it is expanding , so should our minds .

Time is Flexible , it is Malleable , There are gravitational forces that Bend Time Space so Vividly we can SEE it .

So the Idea that Time is an Absolute constant is a farce .

Quantum mechanics bears this out as well . That Time is measured differently at the sub atomic levels of Particle physics .

The Bible agrees with science very well actually , just that a lot of people dont agree with the Bible .

Nick

Tom, and others. Check out this film.

Programming of Life (45mins)
http://bit.ly/nKX0G1

RK Meier

I disagree that fundamentalism ITSELF is an embarrassment to the Bible, but rather the means by which some of them choose to express their beliefs. Many fundamentalists base their literal beliefs upon the translated Word of God. Something is lost in even the best translation. But I'm not sure that a slavish devotion to the infallibility of science is any more intellectually responsible than is reasoned faith. Science is a tool, and can provide answers, but is not itself the answer.

Mark Campbell

I remember the creation days being pegged at a certain few thousand of years each, according to impeccably researched and revealed biblical chronology. There was nothing ambiguous or fluid about the claim. So now, it's indeterminate. My, how god's truth is never changing.

tom sheepandgoats

Those who revere science will praise it for continual advancement and adjustment in the face of updated knowledge. But let spiritual matters do the same, and listen to them howl!

Spiritual things should be able to adjust with the times, so long as those adjustments stay true to the Bible itself. New insights, adaptations, and adjustments occur all the time. No one's ever said differently, and only the most immature of people think all things should be set in stone.

online flash game

Time , what an interesting and misunderstood subject . Space/Time as Albert would have it .

Our own Galaxy turns once , it is called a Galactic year , ..... If we measured Time in THAT time frame , as 1 year Your lifespan would be about 7 seconds ( Take a deep breath , ok your dead) But that is just referencing our own Galaxy , out of how many billions of Galaxies ???

If we take into consideration That Time is measured on a different scale than We measly , worthless , arrogant , self assertive Humans would have it . Then we easily see that the Bible is in COMPLETE AGREEMENT with Science

God who has the privilege , of measuring time however he feels like . ( Maybe Jupiters Orbit is the HOUR , or Minute who knows )

But the Fact is The Universe is old , it is expanding , so should our minds .

Time is Flexible , it is Malleable , There are gravitational forces that Bend Time Space so Vividly we can SEE it .

So the Idea that Time is an Absolute constant is a farce .

Quantum mechanics bears this out as well . That Time is measured differently at the sub atomic levels of Particle physics .

The Bible agrees with science very well actually , just that a lot of people dont agree with the Bible .
+1

John

Jehovah's Witnesses have a web site (jw.org) and this is not it. This sort of "witnessing" is not condoned by Jehovah's organization.

tom sheepandgoats

I don't believe that is true. Show me where. Besides, I don't offer this as "witnessing." This is a hobby. I'm a Witness and I like to write. What do you think I should write about?

The comments to this entry are closed.