Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Joshua10]

If God is perfect then how can he be imperfect?

He must allow imperfection to fulfill its part within that perfection.

How is this philosophy symmetrically balanced though other than by the formula:

Perfection/Imperfect=Perfection/Imperfection

In other words ........Perfection overlapping Imperfection.

Yeah, and what if gods are imperfect?

And what if they are righteous?

By what perfect standards are you measuring these gods against?

[LuckyR]

If God is perfect then how can he be imperfect?

He must allow imperfection to fulfill its part within that perfection.

How is this philosophy symmetrically balanced though other than by the formula:

Perfection/Imperfect=Perfection/Imperfection

In other words ........Perfection overlapping Imperfection.

Yeah, and what if gods are imperfect?

And what if they are righteous?

By what perfect standards are you measuring these gods against?

Routine standards. Polytheistic gods were routinely imperfect by any standard. The concept of godly omniscience was proposed relatively recently (in a historical time-line) with the invention of monotheism.

[Joshua10]

If God is perfect then how can he be imperfect?

He must allow imperfection to fulfill its part within that perfection.

How is this philosophy symmetrically balanced though other than by the formula:

Perfection/Imperfect=Perfection/Imperfection

In other words ........Perfection overlapping Imperfection.

Yeah, and what if gods are imperfect?

And what if they are righteous?

By what perfect standards are you measuring these gods against?

Routine standards. Polytheistic gods were routinely imperfect by any standard. The concept of godly omniscience was proposed relatively recently (in a historical time-line) with the invention of monotheism.

These gods ain’t much use then.

[LuckyR]

Yeah, and what if gods are imperfect?

And what if they are righteous?

By what perfect standards are you measuring these gods against?

Routine standards. Polytheistic gods were routinely imperfect by any standard. The concept of godly omniscience was proposed relatively recently (in a historical time-line) with the invention of monotheism.

These gods ain’t much use then.

You, like everyone else, get an opinion.

[Joshua10]

And what if they are righteous?

By what perfect standards are you measuring these gods against?

Routine standards. Polytheistic gods were routinely imperfect by any standard. The concept of godly omniscience was proposed relatively recently (in a historical time-line) with the invention of monotheism.

These gods ain’t much use then.

You, like everyone else, get an opinion.

Well,I just mention it because there are many individuals wandering around the earth who believe that they are their own god.Would you agree? They are all going to die though so that doesn’t make them much of a god does it if they have no control whatsoever over death.That is why I say that they ain’t much use then.

[Dea Ann Bridegroom]

Lord in heaven. Taken from the King James version of the bible. It is translated from original Hebrew transcripts. The Lord that calls himself I Am. He is our creator of all mankind; including, the Earth, stars in Heaven and the air we breath.

[LuckyR]

Routine standards. Polytheistic gods were routinely imperfect by any standard. The concept of godly omniscience was proposed relatively recently (in a historical time-line) with the invention of monotheism.

These gods ain’t much use then.

You, like everyone else, get an opinion.

Well,I just mention it because there are many individuals wandering around the earth who believe that they are their own god.Would you agree? They are all going to die though so that doesn’t make them much of a god does it if they have no control whatsoever over death.That is why I say that they ain’t much use then.

Well we're living in the Humanism era (the Theism era having passed), so yeah viewing things through our own personal lens is standard now. Even those who CHOOSE to believe in gods and follow religious dogma are exercising their humanist options to do so. Thus while in this or that specific situation a religion follower can profess the personal importance of gods to themselves (which can be completely accurate, BTW) it isn't the same scenario as life and personal opinions in the Theism era, when every single decision of importance was viewed by everyone as "how will my decision affect my relationship to god?" and scientific inquiry was nonsensical because everything worth knowing was contained in the word of God.

[Sculptor1]

what has he actually done wrong?

Male nipples?
Some humans have tails.
Wisdom teeth are a problem for most people.
Odd muscles:
Auricular Muscles; Palmaris Longus Muscle; Pyramidalis Muscle

But this is the wrongest wrongness. - The Left recurrent laryngeal nerveImage

The nerve is about 6 feet long but only has distance of a few inches to operate. It is almost exactly as if the nerve evolved from a fishy origin and kept growing through the evolutionary process.
But that can't be right since we were created in gods image and he is perfect.
Urummpph

[Joshua10]

These gods ain’t much use then.

You, like everyone else, get an opinion.

Well,I just mention it because there are many individuals wandering around the earth who believe that they are their own god.Would you agree? They are all going to die though so that doesn’t make them much of a god does it if they have no control whatsoever over death.That is why I say that they ain’t much use then.

Well we're living in the Humanism era (the Theism era having passed), so yeah viewing things through our own personal lens is standard now. Even those who CHOOSE to believe in gods and follow religious dogma are exercising their humanist options to do so. Thus while in this or that specific situation a religion follower can profess the personal importance of gods to themselves (which can be completely accurate, BTW) it isn't the same scenario as life and personal opinions in the Theism era, when every single decision of importance was viewed by everyone as "how will my decision affect my relationship to god?" and scientific inquiry was nonsensical because everything worth knowing was contained in the word of God.

Can you definitively prove there is no God though? You definitely know you can’t prove it so why make such foolish statements when you could be wrong? What you mean is that you HOPE there is no God.

[Joshua10]

The thing is with SOUND philosophy,you are in no better position if you are a theist and are proved right than if you are an atheist.

[LuckyR]

Can you definitively prove there is no God though? You definitely know you can’t prove it so why make such foolish statements when you could be wrong? What you mean is that you HOPE there is no God.

Oh, you so don't understand me. I have always said that gods exist, since they do. Though gods exist inter-subjectively, not objectively. That is to say gods exist in the minds of their followers, just as corporations, countries and money do. Everyone agrees Germany exists, gods exist the same way.

[Joshua10]

Can you definitively prove there is no God though? You definitely know you can’t prove it so why make such foolish statements when you could be wrong? What you mean is that you HOPE there is no God.

Oh, you so don't understand me. I have always said that gods exist, since they do. Though gods exist inter-subjectively, not objectively. That is to say gods exist in the minds of their followers, just as corporations, countries and money do. Everyone agrees Germany exists, gods exist the same way.

So you HOPE that God doesn’t exist outside of peoples minds then…….however, you certainly cannot definitively prove it.

You have no choice but to admit this.

Otherwise, definitively prove it.

[Belindi]

I think if God exists outside of people's minds then 'God' does not mean some sort of entity that occupies space, but refers to order, reason, goodness, truth, or beauty.

[Pattern-chaser]

I think if God exists outside of people's minds then 'God' does not mean some sort of entity that occupies space, but refers to order, reason, goodness, truth, or beauty.

Yes, I grok God as a guide or shepherd of life itself, all life, in whatever shape or form it shows itself.

[LuckyR]

Can you definitively prove there is no God though? You definitely know you can’t prove it so why make such foolish statements when you could be wrong? What you mean is that you HOPE there is no God.

Oh, you so don't understand me. I have always said that gods exist, since they do. Though gods exist inter-subjectively, not objectively. That is to say gods exist in the minds of their followers, just as corporations, countries and money do. Everyone agrees Germany exists, gods exist the same way.

So you HOPE that God doesn’t exist outside of peoples minds then…….however, you certainly cannot definitively prove it.

You have no choice but to admit this.

Otherwise, definitively prove it.

You're missing the point. It has nothing to do with what I hope or don't hope for. It's not about me (or you). Hoping won't change a metaphysical entity into a physical one. It's baked into the definition of what we're discussing.