To End?

[TumH20Coreybear]

Okay, so here it is.

I believe I follow Einstiens path with this one.

Or was it... Galaleo... did I even spell that right?

Anyway.

Science vs. Religion makes perfect sense, it is a good discussion.

However Science vs. God makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

If God exists than God must be reason, must be truth, and must be perfect. (these are three standards that I will explain if anyone has questions)

If this is true, then science and god should be perfectly alligned.

Peace out yo.

 

[Mr. Hair]

.If God exists than God must be reason, must be truth, and must be perfect. (these are three standards that I will explain if anyone has questions)

Why must this be so? Reason isn't perfect and truth is sometimes unreasonable. As for perfection; only imperfection is perfect, perfection is always flawed... (And thus perfectly imperfect)

*smiles*

I just tend to feel that words, concepts and attributes can be... Imprecise, subjective and abstracting. Perfectly themselves, perhaps, but never perfectly perfect. (For one thing, it would imply limits to 'God', which is often understood to be beyond understanding. But then, is God limited to unlimitedness?)

But then those beliefs of mine are based on subjective perspectives as well, and so cannot be perfectly perfect either. Perhaps they just are.

A paradox, and yet not.

(Please feel free to go into more detail though, I'd be very interested to read anything you have to say )

I believe I follow Einstiens path with this one.

Or was it... Galaleo... did I even spell that right?

As a matter of fact, it sounds more in the line of Newton's thought then anything to me. Though that probably owes more to ignorance on my part then anything else.

(Finally, I must apologise for the rambling nature of this reply. It's never a good idea to get me thinking these days...)

EDIT* If we ignore for the moment that no questions were posed, I've noticed that I haven't answered any questions that you haven't asked. *smiles once more*