Proofs of Design with Witnesses - Final Proof Cannot be Argued

a reply to: GetHyped

No redifining. There are two definitions to the word in question. To ration something is to give portion and that relates to the other definition of ration being used as defining something you first have to define the parameters or context however when it comes to the spoken word then the dual definitions are meaningless because the same sound is used to produce the word thereby entraping you into something by giving you a false choice of belief in what the sound really means. I know i am not the only one that sees many saying one thing but doing another.

a reply to: deadeyedick

What does rationing have to do with anything? That's a different word entirely. As for your second definition, I have no idea what dictionaries you've been looking at but here's a few more definitions for you:

Having or exercising the ability to reason.
2. Of sound mind; sane.
3. Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior. See Synonyms at logical.
4. Mathematics Capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers.

Hint: I'm obviously not talking about definition #4.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

a reply to: GetHyped

omg put all the definitions together and see what you get. The root is ration. All definitions are formed from the root and have common ground but the sound is always the same and pointing to the base. To ration is to save a portion or divide something. Therefor if i am rational then that means i am making divisions or giving portions in order to understand a concept of something. Like i said it was surprising to hear you use the word rational in the context you did because it so clearly defines the basis of the thread.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Yeah, silly me for using the dictionary definition of words. I'm glad we have you around to redefine them as you fit. What was your point again? Oh yeah, it rests on you bizarre redefinition of commonly understood terminology. That's the most round about straw man I've ever seen.

Plot twist: your behavior here is irrational.

a reply to: windword

Yes I did.. but never was it called or is it a "revelation".

Light and DNA are in fact related as I see it.

There is a language to DNA.

Light can be found to be related to everything... it just depends on your perception.

DNA is in fact a programming language.

I think its safe to say you see red and call it red when it's in fact not red at all when you get down to the root of "red".

You said yourself that light is an illusion. What does that make reality then?

If reality is also an illusion then.... uh....

Back to reality as we know it..

If DNA is a molecule that encodes instructions used in developing life and viruses then how is it instructed?

DNA has information which is a "language" that informs just like letters from the alphabet form words to inform...

Do you think cells in our body communicate??

Taking it back to the subject, I'll try to address each point since many of you are having trouble making connections.

PREMISE 1
DNA represent letters making Proteins. They form in root codons, just like language. Links of letters are Words (proteins). The human body is a book.

Genetic codons form in roots of three. These roots are the code for all the proteins / amino acids. There are 20 amino acids and 2 stop codon groups, which comprise the building blocks of the human body as a template. There are 22 letters of Hebrew, each forming in the following pattern of roots of three: 3 mothers, 7 doubles and 12 elementals.

3 "Mother" letters: Aleph, Mem, Shin
7 "Double" letters: Beth, Gimel, Daleth, Kaph, Pe, Resh, Tau
12 "Simple" letters: He, Vau, Zain, Cheth, Teth, Yod, Lamed, Nun, Samekh, Ayin, Tzaddi, Qoph

DNA forms by the very same pattern:

3 Punctuation groups (2 stop groups, 1 start group [Methionine])
7 Hydrophobic Amino Acids
12 Hydrophilic Amino Acids

The groupings are arranged by utility, just as in language.

As I stated in the OP, Aleph Bet is the word Father. Letters write the Word of John 1, which is the Son. Mother is ALeph Mem, or strong water, which is the difference between hydrophobic and hydrophilic acids. You cannot have the pairing of information to protein apart from the water, or catalyst.

This is outlined in detail in the document called the Sefer Yetzirah.

There are 22 letters of Hebrew (East) and 24 of Greek (West). Both languages are parallel by their characteristic. Hebrew is concrete and Greek abstract. There are 46 letters in total representing East and West, mirroring the 22 pairs of chromosomes and 2 sex chromosomes. Greek is a complete outline of all basic mathematical ratios. See this WIKI. When the human body is complete, it is the very same mirror of chirality I mentioned regarding chiral symmetry. One side of the human mind is concrete, while the other is abstract. Both are parallel. Here is a good example of this from the language itself.

Hebrew AMEN is Amn. It means True, or let it be so.
Greek AMN means Lamb.

In Greek, there are eight words describing the True Lamb of God in the water of birth from DNA. Free free to look the words up if you like.

AMN - Lamb
AMNi - River of Life
AMNio - Bowl catching the sacrifice of the lamb
AMNion - Sac covering the baby in the womb
Amniotic - Fluid of the womb
Amnesia - Condition of the person when born
Amnesty - Same exact word, only the other side of the meaning. It is when God forgets
dAMNation - When he remembers

As a witness, the Hebrew language draws meaning from single letters as the first root. Then, you have two letter roots, then three. Once you have a triple root, you then add letters between, you get new words. For instance:

n-ph-l means to fall. Nephilim means fallen being. Ilim means knowledge in Arabic. Neph is cloud in Greek, as in the cloud covering knowledge. All uses from Babel are related by meaning.



I will do this for each part of the OP.

a reply to: GetHyped

No you are mistaken. Do you ever remember studing about root words in english class? There is no redifining i am doing if i find the root of the word and use that context to understanding what is being said. Afterall what do you think came first? ration rational or irrational the answer is clear that all forms of the word stem from the root of the word. Behind that root word is a sound that is beyond all words or definitions.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Ok, if it's not clear to you by now when i use the word "rational" that I'm OBVIOUSLY not talking about your weird reinterpretations then you're as lost as OP. Never mind what the root of the word is, it should be clear from the context, common usage and dictionary definition of the word exactly what I'm talking about. And yes, you DO know exactly what I'm talking about when I use the word, you're just being silly and facetious. I'm sorry but your argument will not magically start making sense by keeping this nonsensical back and forth going so give it up already.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: GetHyped

No you are mistaken. Do you ever remember studing about root words in english class? There is no redifining i am doing if i find the root of the word and use that context to understanding what is being said. Afterall what do you think came first? ration rational or irrational the answer is clear that all forms of the word stem from the root of the word. Behind that root word is a sound that is beyond all words or definitions.

The introduction to this Lexicon gives you the answer: Aleph Bet Hebrew Lexicon

a reply to: AlephBet

Oh for goodness sake, there's enough stupid going around in this particular sub-thread without you sticking your oar in.

Wait, I think I'm onto something here...

PREMISE 2: Premise 1 is in direct relation to the meaning of Premise 2. They are parallel abstract versions of the Genesis 1 concrete account. John 1 is abstract, while Genesis 1 is concrete. Just like the Human mind, God has written us in both languages. Greek from the NT outlines a parallel to the Genesis 1 account of creation. Hidden in the Genesis 1:1 verse, you have Pi woven into the Hebrew letters. In John 1, you have the mathematical constant 'e'.

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

KHouse by Chuck Misler shows how this works...

Aside from this, the parallel between the verses, the equations left as a marker, and the nature of a hologram all speak to the meaning of this verse set.

All of the people in this video are lettered, respected and highly motivated toward the idea that the universe is a hologram. The evidence shows it to be true. This key video will open your eyes, if you dare to watch it, to the image we live in as a creation of God. After you watch it, read the verse again. Word (information) is the medium through which all things are made. But it doesn't stop there. It says a light shines on the darkness as a mechanism to overcome darkness, or ignorance (Deny Ignorance / darkness). The parallels to insight from in formed information are too astounding to comprehend, yet this one verse mirrors the very science these guys discuss. In their lecture, they speak of all the other items of invariance and symmetry I mention in the OP.

Where are we so far? In two posts ( Here is the First Post on Language and DNA), I have now show the connections between both Premise 1 and 2, also using a video to show you the connections to the rest. I will keep going in the next post, which will be the last one you need to tie it all together.

a reply to: MamaJ

If DNA is a molecule that encodes instructions used in developing life and viruses then how is it instructed?

Chemistry.

How do molecules form? How do atoms know to how to make a water molecule? Chemistry.

Look, I'm not saying that your metaphysical outlook is wrong or inappropriate. I'm saying that it's inappropriate to link John 1:1 as proof of Jesus being DNA and light or that the biblical god is the creator of Jesus, the universe and DNA and light.

As it is John 1:1 is plagiarized from Plato, Pythagoras and Philo, and in John 1 Jesus is tacked on there, stuck in there, as being the LOGOS that was originally theorized by Plato, as a convenience.

Aleph, explain the symbiotic relationship of mitochondria to life, as it is found in all life. The MtDNA replicates on its own independent of the host cell replicating.

According to science,

Mitochondria arose once in evolution, and their origin entailed an endosymbiosis accompanied by gene transfers from the endosymbiont to the host.

Source

The mitochondria devolved, at this time it only produces 60 proteins yet uses over a thousand, which the host cell now has the blueprints for in its own nucleic DNA. Without mitochondria there is no life as we know it.

The book has been rewritten over time, if you call the human genome a book.

a reply to: windword

Look... think what ya want. I don't care. You keep on about John 1 (with me) and I think you should take that up with the OP. That was his premise and one I never stated. However I do not believe as you do it was plagiarized. If you do... then thats OK.

Call it a metaphysical outlook.. Its my outlook that changes and really doesn't even need a label. It is what it is.

If you or a cell knows something and communicates... it has a language. DNA has a language and so do cells, bacteria, and on and on.... There is no label to be had with this idea.. other than a fact.

I too have studied Plato, Pythagoras and Philo. Your outlook and mine are different and they have been since the day we first communicated. We think differently and thats OK.

I understand and agree with the OP.

You don't. So be it.

a reply to: AlephBet

There are three stop codons: TAA, TAG, TGA.

a reply to: MamaJ

However I do not believe as you do it was plagiarized.

It's not a belief. It's fact.

Greek Philosopher Plato – Logos
Logos is the Greek term meaning “the Word.” Greek philosophers like Plato used Logos not only of the spoken word but also of the unspoken word, the word still in the mind -- the reason. When applied to the universe, Greeks were speaking to the rational principle that governs all things.

A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600 BC to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates the entire universe. Monotheistic Jews used Logos to refer to God, since He was the rational mind -- reason -- behind the creation and coordination of the universe. - See more at: www.allaboutphilosophy.org...

The Greek, metaphysical concept of the Logos is in sharp contrast to the concept of a personal God described in anthropomorphic terms typical of Hebrew thought. Philo made a synthesis of the two systems and attempted to explain Hebrew thought in terms of Greek philosophy by introducing the Stoic concept of the Logos into Judaism. In the process the Logos became transformed from a metaphysical entity into an extension of a divine and transcendental anthropomorphic being and mediator between God and men. Philo offered various descriptions of the Logos.

a. The Utterance of God
Following the Jewish mythical tradition, Philo represents the Logos as the utterance of God found in the Jewish scripture of the Old Testament since God's words do not differ from his actions
www.iep.utm.edu...

John 1:1 is a plagiarization of Philo's LOGOS.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: MamaJ

However I do not believe as you do it was plagiarized.

It's not a belief. It's fact.

Greek Philosopher Plato – Logos
Logos is the Greek term meaning “the Word.” Greek philosophers like Plato used Logos not only of the spoken word but also of the unspoken word, the word still in the mind -- the reason. When applied to the universe, Greeks were speaking to the rational principle that governs all things.

A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600 BC to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates the entire universe. Monotheistic Jews used Logos to refer to God, since He was the rational mind -- reason -- behind the creation and coordination of the universe. - See more at: www.allaboutphilosophy.org...

The Greek, metaphysical concept of the Logos is in sharp contrast to the concept of a personal God described in anthropomorphic terms typical of Hebrew thought. Philo made a synthesis of the two systems and attempted to explain Hebrew thought in terms of Greek philosophy by introducing the Stoic concept of the Logos into Judaism. In the process the Logos became transformed from a metaphysical entity into an extension of a divine and transcendental anthropomorphic being and mediator between God and men. Philo offered various descriptions of the Logos.

a. The Utterance of God
Following the Jewish mythical tradition, Philo represents the Logos as the utterance of God found in the Jewish scripture of the Old Testament since God's words do not differ from his actions
www.iep.utm.edu...

John 1:1 is a plagiarization of Philo's LOGOS.

That is absurd. Philos himself is plagerizing the Old Testament "'The Word" from Hebrew texts, way before his time.

For John 1 to bypass Philos and go to the source, is not plagiarizing.

Hint, the Old Testament came before Philos.

a reply to: windword

Then it is also a fact that everything you have ever said or done has been plagerized by you.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Aleph, explain the symbiotic relationship of mitochondria to life, as it is found in all life. The MtDNA replicates on its own independent of the host cell replicating.

Answer

a reply to: deadeyedick

I haven't taken any of these theories and pretended that they're my own. I have given credit where credit is due, and I cite my sources.