Quote:
Originally Posted by urgeok
perfect means without flaw.
using the imagined spheres .... if there were 2 of them .. flawless ... how would one cancel out the other.
for the record - there is nothing perfect by measurable standards ..
but even so .. your reasoning is what i call a religious arguement - it still takes faith to believe in any of it.
|
without flaws if flawless - Perfect, at least as i'm using it here, implies not simply that something is itself without flaws, but that it is the ultimate, pure and absolute expression of its being. . . thus, any existing thing - particularly in material or real sense - is not perfect because it exists in its own finite and limited existence. . . God, being omnipresent and infinite is more than merely flawless - God is perfection itself and it is precisely this PERFECTION against which all else is imperfect.
as for STE's comment - i'm not trying to head that direction (nor for that matter seriously attempting to persuade someone to believe or not believe) - i was just recounting some of the classic philosophical arguments about the nature of the divine
urge is exactly right (as kierkegaard would agree) that belief is the only thing available to we the imperfect (as only the perfect could have perfect knowledge) and belief always requires a blind leap of faith. we are, as nietzsche so rightly put it, "the bungled and the botched" - i always find comfort in that idea.