[Quote=Pascal]1st thing, watch your grammar where it really counts, you said:
white represents perfect good, God and black represents perfect evil, Satan.
You should have added an extra comma after God, because otherwise he is placed in the same group as black and evil and you know who... obviously this isn't what you meant lol.[/Quote]
I've changed that now. Sorry for not having perfect grammar. Lol! Thanks for pointing that out though.
[Quote=Pascal] 2nd, it sounds incredibly racist, imagine how African Americans, and any other non-caucasians feel about this analogy.[/Quote]
I didn't mean that black was evil and white was good. I was using symbolism to make a point much like Christ used symbolism in His parables to make His points clearly.
[Quote=Pascal] 3rd, black and white are not colors. White is the equal existance of all colors and black is the lack of light of any color.
[/Quote]
I thought the opposite, that white was the absence of all colour and black was the inclusion of all colour. Oh well.
[Quote=Slater]actually, both of those theories are the same thing...
We define the color of something by what wavelengths of light it reflects, cause it's only those wavelengths that reach our eyes. For example, my blue binder absorbs all wavelengths of light except for the wavelength of this shade of blue.
When you add (black) ink to a piece of white paper, the same thing happens. The black ink absorbs all (actually, absorbs most) of the wavelengths of light hitting it, so very little light is reflected from that black ink back to our eyes. The sensors in our eyes interpret this lack of wavelengths as black. The paper appears white because our eyes are recieving the reflection of virtually all the wavelengths in the visible spectrum.
Now, in the same example with the paper and ink, imagine that one was shining a red-tinted lightbulb on it. The ink would still appear black for the same reasons, but the paper would not be white; it would be red because it can only reflect red light (since the red wavelengths are the only ones available).
Now, when you add several colors of something to something that is white, you get something that is not hard to explain. Say you mix a red filter with a green one. Very little light will get through because the red filter is only going to let light with a wavelength of red through, and the green is only gonna let the light with wavelength of green through. The result is that the first filter lets some light through and the second filter doesn't let any of that light through because the wavelength isn't right for that filter. This is essentially what happens when you mix several shades of paint, although the nature of the paint's chemical makeup will most often leave you with a sort of brownish shade rather than actual black.[/Quote]
What i dont understand about this theory of colour is that yellow and blue come together to make green, yellow and red make orange, red and blue create purple, i think. Why dont these combinations of colour all make black since one colour is only one wavelength of light and another colour is another.
Therefore all colours when mixed should make the same colour, black, the absence of wavelengths of light since the red colour blocks all wavelengths except red, and the yellow or blue blocks all wavelengths of all colours but yellow or blue, depending on the colour you're mixing, making no wavelengths of any colour when two different colours are mixed. Alternatively you get two coloured filters of different colours. Same thing happens there. Yellow and blue filters make green, not black. Out of curiosity since nobody else has asked I guess I'll be the one to ask. Why is this the case?
[Quote=Mastersquirrel]Kura, I like your analogy. Good thinking.[/Quote]
[Quote=Esoteric]But I also agree that it's being way over-analyzed. I commend your effort at trying to make an analogy. It is very difficult.[/Quote]
[Quote=Yumie]I think it's a good idea, Kura. As many before me have taken the time to point out, there are places where perhaps you could work on it a bit, but taking the time to find ways to relate Christianity on a simpler level with others is commendable.[/Quote]
[Quote=Mangafanatic]Anyways, while I think the analogy does have some kinks to iron out, it could be used effectively to convery the gospel to those who have no prior understanding of its precepts. Glad to see you thinking about how you can deliver the message effectively!:thumb:[/Quote]
Thanks, I've tried my best to think of a way to make it easy for non-christians to understand christianity, but it wasn't only me that thought of this. I had God's help. ^_^