I do not decieve, nor am I speaking the delusions of my own mind, thoug you may percieve what you will. Look at nazture, you think this happened all by chance? Can there not be a designer? When tyou do something wrong, does your conscince not make you feel guilty? these are all signs of a God.
Calvin079
Did God happen by chance? He would have to be even more complex than the universe if he created it and knew exactly what he was doing, after all.
I do not decieve, nor am I speaking the delusions of my own mind, thoug you may percieve what you will. Look at nazture, you think this happened all by chance? Can there not be a designer? When tyou do something wrong, does your conscince not make you feel guilty? these are all signs of a God.
StopThePresses
Did God happen by chance? He would have to be even more complex than the universe if he created it and knew exactly what he was doing, after all.
No, God di not happen by chance. And yes, He is more complex than man can ever hope to comprehend, for God Himself said "My ways are not your ways, and my thoughts are not your thoughts"
I do not decieve, nor am I speaking the delusions of my own mind, thoug you may percieve what you will. Look at nazture, you think this happened all by chance? Can there not be a designer? When tyou do something wrong, does your conscince not make you feel guilty? these are all signs of a God.
Calvin079
Did God happen by chance? He would have to be even more complex than the universe if he created it and knew exactly what he was doing, after all.
No, God di not happen by chance. And yes, He is more complex than man can ever hope to comprehend, for God Himself said "My ways are not your ways, and my thoughts are not your thoughts"
Okay, I don't care what the Bible says, because that carries the implied assumption that I believe that what is written in it is true, which is obviously not the case, and popular opinion alone is not a very compelling argument for the truth value of something. Anyway...
You can't say that it doesn't make sense for one thing to simply exist without deliberate design because it's too complex, and then turn around and say it makes sense for something even more complex (God) to exist without anything having made it. (Well, you can say it. Just don't expect people who don't believe in your doctrine to act like such self contradictions make any sense.)
Which definition sounds more convincing to you? The etymological one which relies on the literal meaning of the word based on the words from which it is constructed or one which merely follows a colloquialism? The link I provided actually dove into the history of the word and discussed its original meaning; it was very extensive. All you did was provide a very narrow set of words.
You have not proven or even tried to lay out an argument as to why the meaning extracted by etymology is the most "convincing" one or like you said earlier in the thread, the "true" one.
You also seem to believe that the old meaning of words is the true one while the meanings they have now are some form of deterioration of the original meaning, and are undesirable.
Both of the above are simply your opinions. Nothing more, at this point.
Log in to comment