The Religion Discussion

[AdamB]

"Scriptures" are supposed to give guidance, informing about GOD, man and establishing GOD's legislation (laws) for man to follow.

Earlier on you said "man was created for no other reason but to worship GOD alone".

Why is it then God needed to send scripture and teach man how to worship?

Messengers were sent:
1. As a mercy to man from GOD
2. To show / lead man to the way of GOD
3. To establish the proof against man. So that on the Day of Judgment, man would have no excuse like to say that the message or messenger did not reach them. No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that.

If the Bible is flawed and cannot accurately provide this guidance, then will it provide misguidance even though its followers have good intention? Is the vast divisions of its followers evidence of this?

but there is division and difference of opinion in every single religion!

Difference of opinion with each opinion being correct is not the same as difference of opinion with only one correct opinion and many deviated sects that may be outside of the religion.

[AdamB]

humes I ask a simple question,
can you tell me what s evil?

If it's so simple, answer it. With your answer, proceed appropriately.

I've argued my point clearly, and you've failed to contend it reasonably. Maintain the empty denials, or bring a substantial rebuttal to the table. Your choice.

humes all I need to know is what do you consider evil
we really need to define this before we can go any further.

yuh moving like dspike now!

[megadoc1]

Duane,AdamB,bizzare and others what do you guys gather from humes' last few posts ?

If the Bible is supposed to be, as you yourself said, an instruction manual for life, but its instructions are impossible to interpret "accurately", then it's flawed.

is he saying that

1.the Bible is open to interpretation
2.people interpret the Bible their own way and some do evil as it says
3.therefore the Bible is flawed

Is this his argument? I just want to be sure that I am not misunderstanding him.
if that's his argument then we need to be clear on what is evil
am I being unfair?

We can go further, man. You define it. If we disagree, we move accordingly.

that's the problem, my definition of evil comes from the bible
so I need to know your definition of evil and where it is taken from ...

[firstchoicett]

^ well said .

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ some more feedback would be good

you are complimenting him when he said early on in this thread that Hindu gods are demons that he cast out of someone.

Simple vocabulary.
Words have specific meanings.
Using terms like "I don't think you grasped the gist of what I was trying to say" and "read between the lines" cannot sugar coat the word, nor can you apply your own meaning to a word and say "Well that is what I meant". "their religion is called POOR" is what it means.

Similarly infidel means un-believer, so I don't see what is wrong with using the term.

in·fi·del   [in-fi-dl, -del]
noun

1. Religion
a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.

2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.

3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infidel

if you twist meanings around in your head, I wonder if what you are telling us about your own beliefs is actual or just what you choose to believe.

Duane,
You should know by now that I back up my statements with evidence. BTW this is no fight as suggested.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infidel

Excerpt:
Islamic

Infidel is an English language word commonly used to translate the equivalent Arabic language word for non-Muslims; kafir, literally the one who "covers", is usually translated as "disbeliever"; i.e. in English translations of the Quranic verse, 109:1,[16][17][18] In the Islamic doctrinal sense, the term only refers to a person who does not recognize the one God (Allah) such as atheists and polytheists. However, since Islam considers Jews and Christians as fellow believers they are called "People of the Book (Ahl al-kitab)" instead.[19][20][21]

Kafir, like infidel, has also come to be regarded as offensive,[22] thus some Muslim scholars discourage its use due to the Quran's command to use kind words.[23][22] It is even a punishable offense to use this term against a Jew or a Christian, under Islamic law.[22] Some contemporary Muslim extremists, however, have applied the term to all non-Muslims.[19]

that is what some people "regard" the word to mean

More interpretations

[Humes]

so I need to know your definition of evil and where it is taken from ...

No you don't.

Define evil as you see it, and continue your argument.

Either way, it doesn't contend the main point. Most Christians base their definition of evil on the Bible. Yet we have Christians who accuse other Christians of doing evil things and basing it on the Bible. Even you have acknowledged that some Christians perform evil acts based on their interpretation of the Bible. And there are Christians who would describe your Bible-based actions and attitude as evil.

So my definition of evil is not the deciding factor in this argument at all. Even Christians, including yourself, using Bible-based definitions of evil, think that the Bible can be interpreted to justify evil acts.

[megadoc1]

humes is there such a thing called evil? if so what is your understanding of it?
the reason I am asking is because it seems like you are borrowing the bible's
definition of evil to refute the bible...see where this is going?

[firstchoicett]

^ some more feedback would be good

you are complimenting him when he said early on in this thread that Hindu gods are demons that he cast out of someone.

Simple vocabulary.
Words have specific meanings.
Using terms like "I don't think you grasped the gist of what I was trying to say" and "read between the lines" cannot sugar coat the word, nor can you apply your own meaning to a word and say "Well that is what I meant". "their religion is called POOR" is what it means.

Similarly infidel means un-believer, so I don't see what is wrong with using the term.

in·fi·del   [in-fi-dl, -del]
noun

1. Religion
a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.

2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.

3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infidel

if you twist meanings around in your head, I wonder if what you are telling us about your own beliefs is actual or just what you choose to believe.

Duane,
You should know by now that I back up my statements with evidence. BTW this is no fight as suggested.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infidel

Excerpt:
Islamic

Infidel is an English language word commonly used to translate the equivalent Arabic language word for non-Muslims; kafir, literally the one who "covers", is usually translated as "disbeliever"; i.e. in English translations of the Quranic verse, 109:1,[16][17][18] In the Islamic doctrinal sense, the term only refers to a person who does not recognize the one God (Allah) such as atheists and polytheists. However, since Islam considers Jews and Christians as fellow believers they are called "People of the Book (Ahl al-kitab)" instead.[19][20][21]

Kafir, like infidel, has also come to be regarded as offensive,[22] thus some Muslim scholars discourage its use due to the Quran's command to use kind words.[23][22] It is even a punishable offense to use this term against a Jew or a Christian, under Islamic law.[22] Some contemporary Muslim extremists, however, have applied the term to all non-Muslims.[19]

that is what some people "regard" the word to mean

More interpretations

well I complement him for that reply not for everything he wrote on the thread .

At the end of the day who say who God are demon or whatever they thinks it still have one. I know my faith and believe .

[Humes]

humes is there such a thing called evil? if so what is your understanding of it?
the reason I am asking is because it seems like you are borrowing the bible's
definition of evil to refute the bible...see where this is going?

I showed you exactly where this is going in my last post. Regardless of what my definition of evil is, or where I got it, the bottom line is that Christians, yourself included, who define evil based on the Bible, acknowledge that many Christians commit evil acts based on the same Bible.

If the Bible defines evil and but can be used to justify its own definition of evil, it's a flawed text. If the Bible's definition of evil is so open to interpretation that no one can pin down exactly what evil is, it's a flawed text.

So make your argument or keep deflecting. Your choice.

[megadoc1]

humes is there such a thing called evil? if so what is your understanding of it?
the reason I am asking is because it seems like you are borrowing the bible's
definition of evil to refute the bible...see where this is going?

I showed you exactly where this is going in my last post. Regardless of what my definition of evil is, or where I got it, the bottom line is that Christians, yourself included, who define evil based on the Bible, acknowledge that many Christians commit evil acts based on the same Bible.

If the Bible defines evil and but can be used to justify its own definition of evil, it's a flawed text. If the Bible's definition of evil is so open to interpretation that no one can pin down exactly what evil is, it's a flawed text.

So make your argument or keep deflecting. Your choice.

one more time
humes what is evil and how do you know what is evil or not?

[Humes]

One more time: Make your point if you have one to make.

[AdamB]

This must be the best benefit of this thread. Dem fellas make evil stand still, it cannot even be defined...LOL

[megadoc1]

no AdamB! not so.. here whats the problem with Humes' argument.
it is logically invalid!
he is saying that

1.the Bible is open to interpretation
2.people interpret the Bible their own way and some do evil as it says
3.therefore the Bible is flawed

now his first error was to think that the bible is open to interpretations despite the fact that
factions within Christianity accuse each other of wrong doctrine,which follows from interpreting
the scripture any way ones sees fit. .... I gave a perfect example here where d spike, who appears to be a scholar in religious studies accuse me of wrongly interpreting the scriptures and holding on to errant beliefs! despite all of that, Humes maintained his position and move on to his second premise.

now his second premise is flawed because his first premise was made in error! but even if his first premise is true, he committed a fallacy by borrowing the moral code and what we know as evil from the Bible! the very thing he is trying to refute,if the bible is flawed then his second premise is flawed also because It is based on something that Humes claims is flawed...he is already on shaky ground to begin with
the reason I was asking him to define evil, was to be sure that he was not appealing to the moral code given in the bible but he is yet to give an answer!...by default seeing that this is a religious ched I think if Humes is telling me about anything concerning evil , he must be speaking about evil based on
the religious definition of it

all I am saying is this, if his argument relies heavily on something that he say is flawed, then his whole argument is logically invalid..he finds himself borrowing from the bible to refute it! lol
please note: that if I use whats in the bible to confirm the bible I would be accused of circular reasoning,how then could someone use whats in the bible to refute it? what do you call that?

Christians could say something is evil,they can accuse one another of evil,Muslims can call something evil,Hindus can call something evil because they appeal to a divine moral code found in their respective religious texts!! but as long as humes claims that the religious texts are flawed he cannot appeal to its moral code, for him there can't be such a thing called evil

[bluefete]

APOLLO 1

[Commander Gus Grissom, Lunar Module Pilot Ed White II, Command Module Pilot Roger Chaffee]

When examining the umbilical cord that would be his lifeline during his space walk, White was asked by a reporter, “You certainly have to have a lot of faith in the men who made that don’t you?” Christian that he was, White replied, “No, I have to have faith in something greater than man before I would walk in space using that”.

APOLLO 8

[Commander Frank Borman, Lunar Module Pilot Jim Lovell, Command Module Pilot Bill Anders]

“Say something appropriate.”

[NASA instructions for the Apollo 8 Christmas Eve broadcast]

“In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth, and the earth was without form, and void.”

[Frank Borman, Commander, Apollo 8

Christmas Eve 1968, Reading from Genesis 1]

APOLLO 9

[Commander Jim McDivitt, Lunar Module Pilot Rusty Schweickart, Command Module Pilot Dave Scott]

“You realize that on that small spot, that little blue and white thing, is everything that means anything to you—all of history and music and poetry and art and death and birth and love, tears, joy, games, all of it on that little blue spot out there that you can cover with your thumb. And you realize from that perspective that you’ve changed, that there’s something new there, that the relationship is no longer what it was”.

[Rusty Schweickart, Apollo 9 Lunar Module Pilot]

APOLLO 10

[Commander Tom Stafford, Lunar Module Pilot Gene Cernan, Command Module Pilot John Young]

“No one in their right mind can see such a sight and deny the spirituality of the experience, nor the existence of a Supreme Being…. There were indeed moments when I honestly felt that I could reach out and touch the face of God”.

[Gene Cernan, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 10]

APOLLO 11

[Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Buzz Aldrin, Command Module Pilot Mike Collins]

“I poured the wine into the chalice. In the one-sixth gravity of the moon the wine curled slowly and gracefully up the side of the cup. It was interesting to think that the very first liquid ever poured on the moon, and the first food eaten there, were communion elements”.

[Buzz Aldrin, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 11]

APOLLO 12

[Commander Pete Conrad, Lunar Module Pilot Alan Bean, Command Module Pilot Dick Gordon]

“I’m not a religious person…I do not intellectually believe religious things. However, I ought to believe them, because someone has made them work out for me more than just the odds”.

[Alan Bean, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 12]

APOLLO 13

[Commander Jim Lovell, Lunar Module Pilot Fred Haise, Command Module Pilot Jack Swigert]

“Of all that I have ever done, in or out of the space program, that night was the most crucial, the most important, and the most meaningful for me, because that was when I learned about the assurance of answered prayer”.

[Reverend John Stout, Director, The Apollo Prayer League]

APOLLO 14

[Commander Alan Shepard, Lunar Module Pilot Edgar Mitchell, Command Module Pilot Stuart Roosa]

“As a result of my experience in space, any doubts that I had about the Universe being a Divine Creation evaporated, to be replaced with the certainty that the physical Universe and its creatures are the result of divine thought and purpose”.

[Edgar Mitchell, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 14]

APOLLO 15

[Commander Dave Scott, Lunar Module Pilot Jim Irwin, Command Module Pilot Al Worden]

“There I was, a test pilot, a nuts-and-bolts type who had gotten rather skeptical about God, and suddenly I was asking God to solve my problems on the moon. I was relying on God rather than on Houston”.

[Jim Irwin, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 15]

APOLLO 16

[Commander John Young, Lunar Module Pilot Charlie Duke, Command Module Pilot T.K. (Ken) Mattingly]

“You don’t need to go to the moon to find God. I didn’t find God in space. I found Him in the front seat of my car on Highway 46 in New Braunfels, Texas, when I opened my heart to Jesus. And my life hasn’t been the same since”.

[Charlie Duke, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 16]

APOLLO 17

[Commander Gene Cernan, Lunar Module Pilot Jack Schmitt, Command Module Pilot Ron Evans]

“In December 1972 I was the last man to walk on the moon. I stood in the blue darkness of the lunar surface and looked in awe at the earth. What I saw was almost too beautiful to have happened by accident. It doesn’t matter how you choose to worship God…. He has to exist to have created what I was privileged to see”.

[Gene Cernan,Commander, Apollo 17]

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

"Scriptures" are supposed to give guidance, informing about GOD, man and establishing GOD's legislation (laws) for man to follow.

Earlier on you said "man was created for no other reason but to worship GOD alone".

Why is it then God needed to send scripture and teach man how to worship?

Messengers were sent:
1. As a mercy to man from GOD
2. To show / lead man to the way of GOD
3. To establish the proof against man. So that on the Day of Judgment, man would have no excuse like to say that the message or messenger did not reach them. No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that.

If the Bible is flawed and cannot accurately provide this guidance, then will it provide misguidance even though its followers have good intention? Is the vast divisions of its followers evidence of this?

but there is division and difference of opinion in every single religion!

Difference of opinion with each opinion being correct is not the same as difference of opinion with only one correct opinion and many deviated sects that may be outside of the religion.

you didnt answer my question in context.

No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that. So why we need to be taught to worship via a divine book?

I'd appreciate if megadoc1, sweetiepaper etc etc answered too

With regards to divisions, are you saying the opinion of Shia and Sunnis are both correct?

[megadoc1]

No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that. So why we need to be taught to worship via a divine book?

I'd appreciate if megadoc1, sweetiepaper etc etc answered too

Duane I too had similar questions, why do we as children needed training? why do we need to train our children? why don't they just grow up doing good? or being proper in society? and why is it easier for us to do the wrong things? or if we are not trained why do we do wrong instead of right?

[bluefete]

No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that. So why we need to be taught to worship via a divine book?

I'd appreciate if megadoc1, sweetiepaper etc etc answered too

With regards to divisions, are you saying the opinion of Shia and Sunnis are both correct?

Duane: You are being disingenuous. Do our instincts kick in from birth so that we do not need any support from our parents? If our neurological systems are so defined from birth, there would be no need for our parents to nurture us. Does not the same apply to the animal kingdom?

If a baby is left to its own devices from birth, can it instinctively find food and feed itself?

God gave us laws for our own protection. If societies lived according to the tenets of the 10 commandments - what kind of world would it be?

[Humes]

Dread...yuh doh need parents to teach you how to breathe, eat, sleep or perform other natural bodily functions. A baby can do all of those things, and recognises the need for all those things, straight out of the womb.

He didn't say hunting or finding food or building shelter. Those are different from the instinctive knowledge humans are born with.

And the same definitely isn't universal across the animal kingdom. Many, many animal species are totally independent from birth, and depend fully on instinct to provide for themselves.

[firstchoicett]

If a creature can't do those functions Death is near indeed .

[AdamB]

"Scriptures" are supposed to give guidance, informing about GOD, man and establishing GOD's legislation (laws) for man to follow.

Earlier on you said "man was created for no other reason but to worship GOD alone".

Why is it then God needed to send scripture and teach man how to worship?

Messengers were sent:
1. As a mercy to man from GOD
2. To show / lead man to the way of GOD
3. To establish the proof against man. So that on the Day of Judgment, man would have no excuse like to say that the message or messenger did not reach them. No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that.

If the Bible is flawed and cannot accurately provide this guidance, then will it provide misguidance even though its followers have good intention? Is the vast divisions of its followers evidence of this?

but there is division and difference of opinion in every single religion!

Difference of opinion with each opinion being correct is not the same as difference of opinion with only one correct opinion and many deviated sects that may be outside of the religion.

you didnt answer my question in context.

No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that. So why we need to be taught to worship via a divine book?
We were created with the inclination to lowly desires / evil. GOD gave this lowly desires power over the hearts and put them to the test of opposing it in order that through such opposition the hearts may attain the abode of Paradise. Messengers were sent with guidance from GOD on how to oppose these evil desires thereby attaining Paradise.
I'd appreciate if megadoc1, sweetiepaper etc etc answered too

With regards to divisions, are you saying the opinion of Shia and Sunnis are both correct?

The correct opinion is that of Sunnis, better described as Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaa'ah, the people following the messenger and the community (wider or established). The Shia is a deviated sect and by virtue of their belief that 'Ali was supposed to be the recipient of the Quran (and other suibstantial deviated beliefs), they may be outside of Islam. And Allah knows best.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ that is also an opinion.

The Shia think that Sunnis are doing it wrong.

Megadoc1, you are talking about social training and what is considered to be socially acceptable.

I am talking about basic body functions.

If our main purpose is to worship God, why do we need training for that but we do not need training to know how to sleep or when to eat?

[firstchoicett]

People need training to worship God ? God said in all the text worship me in anyway And I will come to you ..
Bible Said Worship me I come to you .
Koran Allah said make one step to me I make 10 to you.
Bhagwat Gita Shri Bhagween Krishna Said Put me in your mind constantly you will come to me .


So with that meaning said who needs training to go to God ? Off course you go temple or Church to worship him . You something it's only the people who don't reply pray bad things happen too . Those who don't pray and them doing good it have to be the devil them worshipping .

[Humes]

You something it's only the people who don't reply pray bad things happen too .

As clearly evidenced by Job.

That is a real ignorant and malevolent thing to say. Terrible things happen to people who pray all the time.

People need training to worship God ?

Yeah. Prayer, and even belief in God, is socialised behavior. A child won't know anything about praying or about God and religion if it isn't told. It wouldn't know anything about a supposed need to worship (in whatever way) if it isn't told about it.

[firstchoicett]

You something it's only the people who don't reply pray bad things happen too .

As clearly evidenced by Job.

That is a real ignorant and malevolent thing to say. Terrible things happen to people who pray all the time.

People need training to worship God ?

Yeah. Prayer, and even belief in God, is socialised behavior. A child won't know anything about praying or about God and religion if it isn't told. It wouldn't know anything about a supposed need to worship (in whatever way) if it isn't told about it.

Well boy As I come from a family that prayers alot over the past year we been true some unexpected situations.. I may have said the wrong thing on my last line. I have come to understand that its all in our Karama If my last life I did good things then this life would be easy, if i did bad things then this one will be hard and if i did shiet then this one will be more shiet.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that. So why we need to be taught to worship via a divine book?

I'd appreciate if megadoc1, sweetiepaper etc etc answered too

With regards to divisions, are you saying the opinion of Shia and Sunnis are both correct?

Duane: You are being disingenuous. Do our instincts kick in from birth so that we do not need any support from our parents? If our neurological systems are so defined from birth, there would be no need for our parents to nurture us. Does not the same apply to the animal kingdom?

If a baby is left to its own devices from birth, can it instinctively find food and feed itself?

God gave us laws for our own protection. If societies lived according to the tenets of the 10 commandments - what kind of world would it be?

I disagree,

while my example was vague at best, animals and man have progressed through millennia without these books quite fine.

Don't get me wrong, I totally support the need for laws but there is also the need for law reform in a evolving and changing world. Slavery was socially acceptable 2000 years ago, but it is completely unacceptable now. Infact most religious texts have guidelines on slavery instead of condemning it entirely.

I digress. I was making the point that there is one way to chew food for all man and beast in every country of the entire world, but in each country there are different ways to pray and different ideas of God, some have even remained secular.

[megadoc1]

Megadoc1, you are talking about social training and what is considered to be socially acceptable.

I am talking about basic body functions.

If our main purpose is to worship God, why do we need training for that but we do not need training to know how to sleep or when to eat?

ah ha ,I am glad you realize the distinction between the two
we don't need training to know how to sleep or when to eat but we need training to be socially acceptable right? don't you think we would need training in how to be spiritually acceptable?
If man (our natrual mummy and daddy)trains us to be socially acceptable before men why do you think its a bad idea for God (our spiritual daddy) to train us in what is spiritually acceptable before God?

what I am saying is this, worshiping God is not a body function, its a spiritual function! God is a spirit and must be worship in spirit and in truth !he seeks to train us in the spiritual side of things.....

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

he seeks to train us in the spiritual side of things.....

train us in which way?

spirituality is part of being sentient, which is also a natural disposition of man. So every human in the world is spiritual, just in different ways. Some people find spirituality in surfing, or even in fasting, others find it in a being a celibate buddhist monk in an isolated temple, others find it in giving 10% of their salary and going to church every sunday.

we have spiritual tendencies naturally, yet you are saying we somehow need a book 10,000 years after human's initial development to tell us how to be spiritual in a proper way?

not to mention there are 20 different books all around the world that people live by based on their own personal religious beliefs. Then there are those with none. Not one of them are condemned in this world more than the other.

There seems to be no built in, specific way to pray, other than the way you feel is right based on your upbringing, personal experiences etc. But no single way that suits everyone.

Eating is built into all of us. There is only one way to eat: you put food in your mouth, chew it and swallow.
We all must eat. Some more than others, some healthy and some unhealthy. Some too much, some too little. Depending on how and what you eat determines your health, your community's health, the health of your children and future generations. So we do get tested on that, but he foundation of the act of eating is absolute. Not the act of worshiping though, that seems made up, similar to the need to party. There are 500 ways to party, no one claims there is one correct way that everyone should follow. (sorry if that made it seem trivial)


Worship is not even built into us like the need to love and be loved by other humans. So why do you think it is thought that we were created with the sole purpose of worship?

[megadoc1]

ok duane ...I cant add anything else here ,if that's your view then let it stand for now, maybe later I will address what you are saying if anything comes to mind...thanks

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ not my view

I've observed these things and I'm asking why religious opinions differ and I'm asking to explain your own opinion convincingly.

[d spike]

...Worship is not even built into us like the need to love and be loved by other humans. So why do you think it is thought that we were created with the sole purpose of worship?

Perhaps it might help if they state what their definition of worship is...

There are some schools of thought which teach that being aware of God's presence is worship. This concept allows its adherents to be constantly in a state of "worship". Buddhism is a good example. "To see the fingerprint of the Creator in his creation"... It just means to be less absorbed by the noise inside your own little bubble, and more aware of life around you.

If the concept of "worship" that is held by those who uttered the statement you question, is one of rattling tambourines and singing/shouting and frightening the crap out of the rats in the ceiling, then certainly this is awkward to do perpetually - and most likely wrong. The "Christians" in Thessalonia, if I recall rightly, suffered from this delusion... to the point where they had others bring them food and drink while they "worshipped". They even refused to bathe, as this would require them to cease their "worship". Paul had to demand that this nonsense be stopped.