"True worship acceptable to God"

[Elijah John]

Jehovah's Witnesses claim to be the only group which practices "true worship acceptable to God" and that all other sects do not.

Seems an extraordinary claim.

Prove it!,... Give us extraordinary proof to support your extraordinary claim.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 58 by Pierac]



[center]
Hoodwinked by creationist propaganda[/center]

Really when like when scientists say that the alphabet is a set of letters or symbols they are only talking metaphorically.

Sorry, but real alphabets are created by humans. In order to communicate.

Calling DNA a "code" is a way for scientists to communicate a very complex and very fundamental bit of biology.

You are mistaking an analogy for what it represents. The DNA acts LIKE a form of code.. They give bits of it LETTERS or labels. What DNA really is ... is acid found in all biological systems, which is evidence for the theory of evolution.

When it's called a "code", or a "sequence", that's a metaphor.
It's the same way when we describe our stomach as part of the "digestive system". It's a DESCRIPTION of what it DOES.

You have been hoodwinked by the creationists who love nothing better than to play on words. Calling DNA a "code" or a "language" is to help up UNDERSTAND what's happening. But what's happening is ALL CHEMICAL.

DNA are CHEMICALS.. not parts of books.

Here is a fragment of a less SIMPLE way of describing what DNA really is:

"The two DNA strands are termed polynucleotides since they are composed of simpler monomer units called nucleotides. Each nucleotide is composed of one of four nitrogen-containing nucleobases—either cytosine (C), guanine (G), adenine (A), or thymine (T)—and a sugar called deoxyribose and a phosphate group. The nucleotides are joined to one another in a chain by covalent bonds between the sugar of one nucleotide and the phosphate of the next, resulting in an alternating sugar-phosphate backbone. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA


So, you see, calling that a "code" is way simpler.
What you call a "language" ( CGAT ) is the simpler way of describing cytosine, guanine, adeline and thymine.

These are MOLECULES. They are CHEMICALS.

The creationists love nothing better than to mess with people's ability to understand anything that seems INTERFERE with their beliefs. Don't feel bad about having been fooled by them... they have an extremely effective propaganda.


Hope you get to realize that DESCRIPTIONS aren't the same as what is being DESCRIBED.


The difficulty you are having is a SEMANTIC one, and not a scientific one.

And your difficulty stems from the creationist's ability to mangle language to suit their purposes. Religions are very clever that way. Word games, however are not science and never will be.

IF you want science facts, I suggest you look towards reputable science, not creationist propaganda.

You have been fooled by very effective anti-science propaganda.
I suggest taking a bit of time off from debating the theory of evolution to study it.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 58 by Pierac]



[center]
Hoodwinked by creationist propaganda[/center]

Really when like when scientists say that the alphabet is a set of letters or symbols they are only talking metaphorically.

Sorry, but real alphabets are created by humans. In order to communicate.

Calling DNA a "code" is a way for scientists to communicate a very complex and very fundamental bit of biology.

You are mistaking an analogy for what it represents. The DNA acts LIKE a form of code.. They give bits of it LETTERS or labels. What DNA really is ... is acid found in all biological systems, which is evidence for the theory of evolution.

This marvelous acid that is found in all biological systems is evidence for creation....intelligent design. Nothing so complex could just happen. There is no way that some kind of intelligence was not involved.

Don't get hung up on"creationists" who unwittingly undermine the Bible itself by setting forth erroneous statements such as the earth and everything on it was created in 6 24-hr. days. They are wrong. The information gathered by scientists does not conflict with what the Bible actually says. (A "day" in the bible is of undetermined length.)


.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 62 by onewithhim]



[center]

We have plenty of evidence of intelligent BELIEVERS who happen to be wrong about intelligent design[/center]

This marvelous acid that is found in all biological systems is evidence for creation....intelligent design. Nothing so complex could just happen. There is no way that some kind of intelligence was not involved.

Look, thinking that nothing so complex can't happen or that there is "no way" that some kind of intelligence was not involved IS NOT EVIDENCE for anything other than what you think about it.

Your lack of imagination, and your insistence on a "creator" isn't evidence for intelligent design. It's evidence of your BELIEF, instead.


____________

Question:

• 
  
  How is your incredulity about natural causation of DNA evidence of "intelligent design"?
  
  

____________

[otseng]

[Replying to post 42 by Blastcat]

But in THIS forum, tam, we ARE supposed to take the Bible as authoritative. Not whatever we can dream up in our heads about "Christ" or the Father.

The question/point was NOT with regard to what is the final authority in this forum. The question/point was with regard to what/who is the final authority on "matters" (quoting OWH). By "matters" OWH did not mean "matters" that pertain to the 'final authority' in this forum. By "matters" OWH meant matters that pertain to what is true and what/who is the final authority for Christians.

Moderator Clarification

Tam is correct. The guideline that the Bible is considered authoritative only means that the Bible is not to be questioned as having authoritative weight. But, it does not mean that the Bible is the final authority. You can still debate that other things might have more authority than the Bible.


______________

Moderator clarifications do not count as a strike against any posters. They serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received and/or are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels a clarification of the rules is required.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 43 by dio9]




[center]
Calling other people's kind of worship "Empty" is being disrespectful[/center]

When you sit down to eat , are you worship-fully grateful for your bread? True Worship is nothing more than appreciation and gratitude.

Meh, you have a peculiar definition for "worship".

It's not bad.. it's just rather narrow and not the common definition we would find in an ordinary English dictionary.

Usually, when I think of "worship", I think of reverence, adoration and praise.
But I think that you are right in saying that it's ALSO gratitude.

Some people just burn a candle or some other mindless ritual and call THAT "worship".

You like your kind of worship, and they like their kind of worship.
Worship the way that you like.

To say that someone else's worship AINT TRUE.. is rather disrespectful of those other people.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 36 by tam]


[center]
What or who the final authority on religious matters is[/center]

Of course, this is not really the point of my post (re: the claim that the final authority is the bible, rather than the truth that the final authority - except over His own Father - is Christ.)

Ok, I got a clarification from Osteng:

I wrote earlier:

"But in THIS forum, tam, we ARE supposed to take the Bible as authoritative. Not whatever we can dream up in our heads about "Christ" or the Father."

To which, Osteng clarified:

" The guideline that the Bible is considered authoritative only means that the Bible is not to be questioned as having authoritative weight. But, it does not mean that the Bible is the final authority. You can still debate that other things might have more authority than the Bible. "

So, if I understand Osteng correctly, as long as we don't QUESTION the authority of the Bible, we can talk about what the FINAL authority on religious matters might be.

And if I understand what you usually claim, tam, YOUR final authority on your religious beliefs is what you might call a "conversation with Christ" that you have yet to convince anyone is really happening.


Is that correct?

[tam]

[Replying to post 59 by tam]

So... as per the example I shared FROM that book (and with perhaps a little bit of reasoning thrown in - if Christ can override something that was written before He walked in the flesh, then obviously His authority is greater and more final than what is written)... Christ - the ACTUAL Word of God - is the final authority.

It seems to me that the Bible is the letter of the Word of God, and Christ and/or God the Father, when speaking directly to individual believers, is/are the spirit of the Word of God.

Peace to you Checkpoint!


I don't think there is ever such a distinction made with regard to the Word of God. The Christ has many titles (Christ is one of them), but He is not called the spirit of the word of God. He is called the Word of God.


He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is The Word of God. Revelation 19:14


The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14

This is a new thought to me, but it means I am now seeing "what the Spirit says to the churches", and Hebrews 4:12-13, in that way. As also "my sheep hear my voice".

Yes? No?

I'm not sure I fully understand what you are asking here, so please forgive me if I do not address your actual question.


Keep in mind that the book of Revelation is inspired (meaning it was given in spirit... and John was in the spirit when He received it). So in that sense you could be seeing what John heard, because John wrote down what He heard.


However, those verses state:


He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.


It does not say let him SEE what the Spirit says to the churches; it says He who has an ear let him HEAR what the Spirit says to the churches.


And...

Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in and dine with him, and he with Me





And so you may indeed HEAR what is written here; if you have an ear (and if you do not, then you should ask for ears to hear - if that is what you wish of course, and keep asking, keep knocking, keep seeking). Because you might consider asking Christ Jaheshua to READ these verses to YOU. So that you hear His voice, His inflection and emphasis, and His love.



For example, His prayer before He is arrested. I used to think (because it seems to be written this way) that He prayed this prayer in front of His apostles. But Christ prayed in private (giving thanks in public, but praying in private). This prayer also was prayed in private (but overheard by a young disciple who followed him).


When I learned that, I wanted to re-read the prayer with that in mind, and this time He read it to me. I heard this prayer in His voice. And I heard the love in His voice. Enough to fill me with the spirit and bring tears to my eyes, at the least.




I may, however, have misunderstood what you were saying. Please elaborate if indeed I have.



Peace to you and to your loved ones, as my Lord gives peace,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[tam]

[Replying to post 36 by tam]


[center]
What or who the final authority on religious matters is[/center]

Of course, this is not really the point of my post (re: the claim that the final authority is the bible, rather than the truth that the final authority - except over His own Father - is Christ.)

Ok, I got a clarification from Osteng:

I wrote earlier:

"But in THIS forum, tam, we ARE supposed to take the Bible as authoritative. Not whatever we can dream up in our heads about "Christ" or the Father."

To which, Osteng clarified:

" The guideline that the Bible is considered authoritative only means that the Bible is not to be questioned as having authoritative weight. But, it does not mean that the Bible is the final authority. You can still debate that other things might have more authority than the Bible. "

So, if I understand Osteng correctly, as long as we don't QUESTION the authority of the Bible, we can talk about what the FINAL authority on religious matters might be.

And if I understand what you usually claim, tam, YOUR final authority on your religious beliefs is what you might call a "conversation with Christ" that you have yet to convince anyone is really happening.


Is that correct?

While Christ is indeed my King and Lord and Master (so my authority)... I said on this thread that, even according to the Bible, Christ is the final authority (except over His Father of course).


I then gave examples from that book to show WHY this is true; and WHY it is HE who is the final authority. Perhaps take another look at my first post (with this clarification from otseng in mind)?



Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 67 by tam]



[center]
Hate to break it to ya, but people aren't words.[/center]

I don't think there is ever such a distinction made with regard to the Word of God. The Christ has many titles (Christ is one of them), but He is not called the spirit of the word of God. He is called the Word of God.

That has to be a metaphor, of course, some POETRY.. people aren't words.

"Tomato" is a word.
It's not the same as the actual red fruit ( veggie ) we CALL a tomato.

"Pizza" is another word.
It's not the same as the ACTUAL ooey gooey tasty midnight treat with anchovies.

We are reading words here in the forum.. not actual OBJECTS or PERSONS.


I don't see any distinction between saying the spirit of the word, the word or someone who supposedly embodies the ideas of God. It's all very vague, if you ask me. Jesus, Christ, whatever you want to call it is also considered PART of the God... a trinity, or NOT, depending on your branch of Christianity.. it's all debatable. The nature of God is in the eye of the beholder. No matter what the Bible says, people seem to disagree on the NATURE of that god/gods.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 62 by onewithhim]



[center]

We have plenty of evidence of intelligent BELIEVERS who happen to be wrong about intelligent design[/center]

This marvelous acid that is found in all biological systems is evidence for creation....intelligent design. Nothing so complex could just happen. There is no way that some kind of intelligence was not involved.

Look, thinking that nothing so complex can't happen or that there is "no way" that some kind of intelligence was not involved IS NOT EVIDENCE for anything other than what you think about it.

Your lack of imagination, and your insistence on a "creator" isn't evidence for intelligent design. It's evidence of your BELIEF, instead.


____________

Question:

• 
  
  How is your incredulity about natural causation of DNA evidence of "intelligent design"?
  
  

____________

That is something we can't get anywhere arguing about, since we have gone over this before. I see Intelligent Design and you don't. That's where we'll have to leave it.