(January 10, 2014 at 2:01 am)Drich Wrote:(January 9, 2014 at 5:15 pm)xr34p3rx Wrote: its not a matter of semantics
its rational thinking
let me emphasize: he was saying that in order for something to be perfect, his outcome must also come to be perfect.
If the painting is bad, then its a bad painter, but if a painting is good, then the painter is good.
make sense?
When does 'rational thinking' exclude the context of a given passage when said thinking is to be focused on said passage?
If the passage is not written in English and the English only interpretation reveals a paradox of some kind then rational thinking dictates a need to examine the passage in its orginal form therefore semantics are needed for proper exegesis?
The only 'rational' reason to exclude 'semantics' when one comes across a contradiction or paradox is the preservation of said contradiction or paradox as a way to change the meaning of a given text. As such your efforts cease to be 'rational' by definition, and then wander into the realm of propaganda or even out right lies.
(January 10, 2014 at 12:07 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: To put it another way: God is defined as the greatest conceivable being; therefore everything else that exists is less than the greatest conceivable being. But if all actuality is created by God and less than the greatest, God's acts aren't the greatest and therefore an even greater conceivable being could exist: a being that only creates the greatest conceivable beings.
-or if one filters this paradox through what is actually written about God in the bible it would read as follows:
God is perfect in that He is complete and lacks nothing. He can/has created beings and places as complete as He is complete. Yet has seen fit to give said beings an oppertunity to either remain complete or fall from this embodiment of completion.
(January 10, 2014 at 12:05 am)Cinjin Wrote: [/hide]Poor cinny still struggles with basic comprehension of the way things are translated. Do you need me to go over it again with you?
My god was not able to translate his own language into English.
again, semantic dodge, either way they are translated at best to our language and still fall back as a fairy tale

xR34P3Rx
it isn't in our nature to think of a God, it is in our nature to seek answers and the concept of God is most influenced in this world.
it isn't in our nature to think of a God, it is in our nature to seek answers and the concept of God is most influenced in this world.