Definitions Are Always Important :: "Destroy"
Yes, definitions are always important. Without agreeing on the meaning
of the terms used in a discussion, reaching an agreement, or even basic
communication of ideas, is not possible.
Take, for an example, the phrase, "I will destroy those who destroy the
earth."
Can any two individuals communicate their ideas concerning the meaning
of that statement UNLESS they can agree on the meaning of the term
"destroy" as used in that scripture? No.
-----
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?qÞstroy
de-stroy (d-stroi)
v. destroyed, destroying, destroys
1. To ruin completely; spoil: The ancient manuscripts were
destroyed by fire.
2. To tear down or break up; demolish. See Synonyms at ruin.
3. To do away with; put an end to: "In crowded populations,
poverty destroys the possibility of cleanliness"
(George Bernard Shaw).
4. To kill: destroy a rabid dog.
5. To subdue or defeat completely; crush: The rebel forces
were destroyed in battle.
6. To render useless or ineffective: destroyed the testimony
of the prosecution's chief witness.
-----
"Destroy," or to destroy, is an action, a 'cause and result' that
expresses existence; "be," something which does not exist cannot "ruin,"
"demolish."
In every instance, "destroy" is an act, the result or consequence of the
work or effort of the destroyer.
Just as the desert does not murder, neither does time. The Sea does not
'destroy' those who swim in it beyond their endurance. Certainly if one
wanders into the desert without an adequate supply of water, they will
die, but the desert did not 'destroy' them. Certainly if one lives long
enough, in time they will die, but 'time' does not perform an act of
destruction.
To discuss the statement, "I will destroy those who destroy the earth,"
we must define the word "destroy." If we will not come to some agreement
on the definition of the word, if we will not accept the definition
intended, then we refuse communication.
The term "destroy" may be used in the literal, definitive, meaning; or
it may be used as a metaphor. Even using it as a metaphor needs
definition: Does the object exist, but in a sense other than as it was,
or different from, its former existence?
Consider a gold coin. Take a file and grind it into gold dust. Does the
gold still exist? Does the gold still retain the same value as it did in
the form as a coin? Can the gold still be used for the same purpose as
the coin? Yes. Does the Coin still exist? No. The Object was destroyed
but its substance was not.
Consider a food, such as a chicken sandwich. Drop it on the dirt, step
on it, cover it with soil and let the worms defile it. Does the chicken
sandwich still exist? Yes. Is it fit for human consumption? No, it has
been "destroyed."
The definitive meaning of "Destroy" is to "cause to be nonexistent."
Both the sandwich and the gold can be heated to the point where the
atoms and molecules dissipate as heat and light, then that heat and
light would grow cold and dark, and their destruction would be complete
and definitive.
Mankind cannot destroy the earth in the sense "to render it non-existent."
We can make it uninhabitable.
If mankind continues to contaminate the seas, then the point will come
when nothing will remain alive in them--they will be 'destroyed.'
If mankind continues to pollute the air--it will become 'un-breathable,'
it will be "destroyed."
If mankind continues to consume the forests, they will be "destroyed."
If mankind engages in biochemical or biological war, the earth may
become uninhabitable -- it will be "destroyed."
If mankind wages nuclear warfare, he will "destroy" the earth.
However, by any method, by any definition, if man renders this world
un-livable so that mankind cannot survive, then man will have "destroyed
the earth." When (not if) this earth has been "destroyed" then God will
DESTROY those who have "destroyed" the earth -- and, God will Destroy
this earth in the literal, definitive, meaning.
"To Destroy," is an action, a 'cause and result.' In every instance,
"destroy" is the result or consequence of the work or effort of "the
destroyer."
owd
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/
-----
Sophistry is not a system of ideas, but a vicious attitude of the mind.
Jacques Maritain
.
|
