But it is semantics because A and K were put in a manner which is open to subjective interpretation.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
As in what you saw in A and K is not what everyone else see's necessarily.
Printable View
But it is semantics because A and K were put in a manner which is open to subjective interpretation.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
As in what you saw in A and K is not what everyone else see's necessarily.
Alexander you keep going in circles and missing the point.
As much as I'm loathe to agree with cafolini, he's right. Mark's got you here, Alex.
If I were to paint God, I would paint myself. I've created and destroyed. I steered the course of my small life and the lives of others with untold and innumerable chain reactions and consequences. I grew a person in myself out of something invisible to the naked eye. I made plants grow by nurturing seeds with water and dirt and offerings of sunlight. I came out of the earth and I will go back into it. So maybe I would paint the earth instead, or my own mother. Maybe I would paint you. We all came from an abyss, so I could attempt to paint one of those, but it would take an eternity and I think I would be quite lost. I don't believe there is something so insignificant and small as a god. This whole thing could be some kind of machine, but that seems wrong and small too.
Thanks :hurray:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
Very well then, I shall cede.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Ok after reading throuhg the posts I was thinking to ask this question which may or may not help that much
Is God worth painting?
The reason I ask this is because
in the world of possessions and money driven people God's painting would perhaps create tensions where by the paintings would become as source of competitions and consequently their cost would become unttainable and would drive people to throw money at it just to own it/them.
I was just thinking of the world of celebrities where all their possessions and jewellery become a sibject of tension and ridiculous amount of money is thrown just to own them.
Would god really want that ? People fighting over something so personal and so futile at the same time?
wanna bid for Him??:)Quote:
Originally Posted by cacian
Hehe...:smilielol5:might do..when I am rich that is:DQuote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Who Is This God Person Anyway?
Philosophy Now Radio Show #8
Who Is This God Person Anyway?
Grant Bartley, Assistant Editor at Philosophy Now, asks “Who is this God person anyway?” with Barry Hingston promoting Christianity, Hamza Tzortzis promoting Islam, and Richard Baron promoting atheism. Who can make the best case for their belief system? Will any of them persuade you? First broadcast on 20 September 2011 on Resonance FM.
Duration: 55 mins (⇓ Download 50MB)
I see 'God' as Einstein did. Therefore, I would paint the universe. Perhaps I would do so with a metaphor.. Hmm.. Maybe I should take out my paints and canvases :D
How would you paint God? With a lot of paint. God's big.
In my novel The Valley of Fire, I portray God as distant, funny, unknowable, desitic-inspired, and genderless. The last part is the toughest, writing dialogue for a character without using gender specific pronouns - but fun.
I've been working on a painting of Krishna for some time and I've finally realized that although He commonly is described as being blue the right hues for His divine person are various shades of purple.
I read somewhere that only Krishna's incarnation has blue, or purple skin, and in reality his divine form cannot be perceived properly by mortals. So, what we see of Him in paintings is simply a derivation of the artist, and is actually different for whosoever sees him, as is their own reality of maya. :D Unsure if it's true or not, but I have a very broad range of reading material. :)
Yes his Krishna's divine form is probably too intense for humans to handle when perceived. In the Gita when He discourses with Arjuna the latter keeps forgetting he is talking to God because uninterupted awareness of such discourse would be too intense for him as well. Krishna's name literally means "black" in Sanskrit, and many, such as Thomas Mann in his novella "The Transposed Heads", have made much of the cult of Krishna as having broken the color barriers that had initially been set up by the Aryan invaders of the Indian sub-continent so long ago, but I think the best description of Krishna's appearence comes from the Vedanta which says He has "a body colored like rain clouds, wrapped in garments resembling lightning and garlanded in forest flowers."
Those are lovely excerpts. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. :)
Hey BookBeauty this sounds great.Quote:
Originally Posted by BookBeauty
Would you post it here?:smile5:
hey that sounds lots of fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett Cottrell
I had somewhere discussed something about using a pronoun that describes both a man and a woman together.
I decided to make one up because there is not one at the minute.
It annoyed me then because my story was about a person that feels both a man and a woman .
I reckon youshould make your one up too.
Let your reader know that youmade it up and use it to write your story.
This is trolling
http://www.herfree.com/avatar2.jpg
I'm confused...what is trolling?Quote:
Originally Posted by begirl001
It's when you make a post that has absolutly nothing to do with the topic of discussion for the purposes of derailing a thread or making people angry. Ironically, whatserface's one-sentence post of "this is trolling" was, in fact, trolling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
I understand what trolling is. What I meant was...What HERE is trolling. I didn't see anything in this thread that was trolling with exception of what you just pointed out.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
:lurk5:
Haha, oh. Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC