The Problem of Imperfect Revelation: Your Thoughts?

[MindForgedManacle]

Oh, I did miss that. But wouldn't it make more sense to say "How X acts is dependent on X's nature", not the other way around? Unless you're, say, referring our epistemic situation with regards to inferring X's nature from its actions?

I may be missing the point here, but more sense in regard to what?

I thought I was a bit unclear when I posted it.

What I mesn is, you said "X's nature depends on how X acts", and my question was that wouldn't it make more sense to say the reverse? That X's actions are dependent on its nature?

Ah, good point. But didn't you earlier state that you were surprised Christians/Muslims didn't take that position, since "it'd leave their opponent without a refutation"?

Exactly. Once you state that the thing you are referring to is not subject to logic, how can there be a logical refutation?

Ooh, that is a good one. My mind was almost blown there. xD That'd put theists in an interesting situation.