Just In
for What is Beauty?

3/3/2007 c1 1Formerly
I suppose you mean well.
2/28/2007 c1 Quelleruth
This was an extremely refreshing piece of writing! One structural point: you might want to tying the theme a *little* bit tighter in the paper, just so that the reader understands precisely why you need to define both goodness and love before discussing beauty.

On another note:

I don't really regard, "Suck it up," as the right response to man's sinful nature-because of it, those who are not saved are subject to the full wrath of God. That's not something that someone can just "suck up". (Of course, I might just be completely misunderstanding the sense in which you used the phrase, in which case you might want to make it clearer.)

Also, to expand on your assertion that no one is good except for God alone, you might want to mention the Biblical definition of good, which is unavoidably based on God's law, and subsequently based on God's very character.

I agree with you about the distortion of what is valued (what is beautiful) in today's culture. Physical beauty is good, (and ultimately isn't relative, though people get it wrong so often), and yet it is loved too much and in the wrong way.

You say, "The most important yet is this: the wounds of Christ would not be nearly as beautiful (yes, I did use that word) nor as meaningful to the Christian, had he not died for the world, selflessly giving his life for ours."

Frankly, I feel the need to admit to you that this is almost nonsensical. The very POINT of Christ's death was to save his elect; he would not have died if not for this purpose.

In Christ alone,

2/28/2007 c1 21Nina Kindred
How beautiful! Words also can be beautiful. You've captured the essence of love in a wonderful way. I loved it. Have you thought about entering it in a contest?

Twitter . Help . Sign Up . Cookies . Privacy . Terms of Service