I think so too, but while still maintaining a personal religious affiliation.Yeah, that’s why I think the goal is finding truth, not religion.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I think so too, but while still maintaining a personal religious affiliation.Yeah, that’s why I think the goal is finding truth, not religion.
Your comment about the author of confusion made me think about the recent and even the past threads on the topic of the flood. As well as many discussions about biology that I have observed and even participated in on here. I would rather not go into some of my conclusions, but I do find it an interesting idea in relation to some of the positions taken by many posters on those threads.If there is but one God behind all the religions with their different takes, then I’d say that God is quite contradictory, confusing and schizophrenic.
The Bible claims that God who created heaven and earth is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33). So it seems to me that it is people, with all their various ideas and religions about God, who are mistaken and confused.
I think that will depend on who makes the comment.Which god?
When we speak of perfection in our human world yes. if we would speak of perfection from a God then the answer would be different. But i think sometimes it is good to leave religion out of the discussion tooSo you see standards as being subjective and as relative as individual concepts of perfection. I tend to agree.
U lost me tooYou lost me on that one.
It will inevitably enter the discussion regardless and here more so than anywhere since it is RF. I think it is how it is handled that makes a big difference. I think you did as good a job as I hope I am doing on the subject.When we speak of perfection in our human world yes. if we would speak of perfection from a God then the answer would be different. But i think sometimes it is good to leave religion out of the discussion too
As a female irradiated just because human men in science said the spatial body was a womb and I will infer it Mother then quote and you evil sister daughter Mother human are evil, about says it all.This may be the lucid thing I have ever seen you post.
I think a state of perfection in generally anything appears to be conceptual rather than actual, but we can see imperfection on another relative scale.
Than we are lost together.U lost me too
Get lostThan we are lost together.
I have no idea what you are saying here. Your posts are cryptic, often indecipherable and I generally have no clue what you are trying to communicate. However, I have read what have all the appearances of derisive remarks leveled against me, men and other posters coming from you. Certainly, it could be some failing on my part, but I have my doubts, since I appear to be able to effectively communicate with practically every other poster on here.As a female irradiated just because human men in science said the spatial body was a womb and I will infer it Mother then quote and you evil sister daughter Mother human are evil, about says it all.
You prove in your expressions the inability to apologise as a man in science for all of the evil displaced natural human living conditions that anyone should own as a life equal.
Even after explaining I was burnt gas irradiated brain changed you still have to try to deride my intellectual status as if somehow yours is more important.
Try getting the lesson I learnt as a female yourself as a man and see what you have to say afterwards.
Too late. HaHaHa.Get lost
Haha
I find this discussion you started to be very goodIt will inevitably enter the discussion regardless and here more so than anywhere since it is RF. I think it is how it is handled that makes a big difference. I think you did as good a job as I hope I am doing on the subject.
The perfection of God appears to be like any state of actual perfection. We really cannot see it or fully comprehend it, but still strive to keep it as a standard to live by. However, many can clearly live lives moving towards a similar standard without embracing any religious position.
GoodToo late. HaHaHa.
You have fun now, ya hear. Good luck storming the castle.Good
I conquered it ya hearYou have fun now, ya hear. Good luck storming the castle.
I don't believe we can attain perfection , morally , bodily, executing flawless actions, always hitting the mark , in this life . I don't think we see perfection around us either . As a Christian I believe the bible when it says after the fall nothing is as it was prior . Even a beautiful flower ,wilts and dies . We get hints and glimpses at its possibility. As things would have been prior to the fall . Maybe its when we look to the skies , a beautiful sunset. Were kinda like fish in the sea and all we know is the water. Spiritually I think we sense something is wrong . With death and diseases. I believe we have eternity set in our hearts, we know there's something wrong but try to live with its brokenness . Trying to cling to this life .I have friends and know of people that have been called perfectionists. This is often spoken of as a positive trait, although at times I have sensed that some also meant picky too.
One question that always comes to my mind on hearing such statements is "How do they know what is perfect?" for whatever it is they do. Or is it that they just like things a certain way that is pleasing to them and others find something pleasing about it too?
Does perfection in anything really exist? Wouldn't you have to know what is perfect in order to approach it? Is it logically possible to achieve perfection and how would you know?
Well, that was the ontological proof that perfection must exists. On the other end, I could posit that one of the qualities of perfection is that it must present itself clearly to everybody, and therefore asking where it is, entails its not existence. A sort of ontological argument against its existence.Aside from the circular, is there any way you can suggest that I or others can see what is perfect?
I think that will depend on who makes the comment.
I am confident that in their mind, they are being specific. Because 'fill in the blank' believes his or her god is the only god and everyone should know that.So perhaps they should be more specific. My god dun it all is kind of arbitrary when it could mean ptah, bramen, viracocha, qʼuqʼumatz, amun etc.
I disagree about the value of the discussion, but the very fact that it is ill-defined could be seen to support the idea that we do not have the capacity to observe a state of perfect perfection or even determine that it can exist.Well, that was the ontological proof that perfection must exists. On the other end, I could posit that one of the qualities of perfection is that it must present itself clearly to everybody, and therefore asking where it is, entails its not existence. A sort of ontological argument against its existence.
At the end of the day, since we can reach contradictory conclusions when things are ill defined, or defined by using equally ill defined terms or other deepities, we have to first precisely define what perfection means. Pending that, the whole discussion has the same value as a discussion about how we can see aksdjfkedsfsefeodjwo.
Ciao
- viole