MMOTW, what makes the most perfect being of them all?

[HeirofSalvation]

Well, I've signed off from this thread, but since you ask persistently and nicely, I'll give my take.
However, this command will keep us striving, keep us doing our best to walk with Christ. Consider if He had said it differently, like: "Be 95% perfect, though your Father in Heaven is 100% perfect." Some self satisfied person would say, "Hey, I'm there, I'm 95% perfect. I can relax in my Christian life now." But since we are to strive to be perfect as God in Heaven is perfect, we should keep striving (with the help of the Holy Spirit of course) until we die, if we are to obey the command.

Is it just me....or did the Linguist just delineate the difference between two things....namely:
1.) the status of being 95% perfect
2.) being "perfect" as God in Heaven is perfect

JoJ....personally....I don't think you can speak of something like 95% perfection...as a non-linguist, I have a "linguistic objection" to your speaking this way.

 

[OldRegular]

Is it just me....or did the Linguist just delineate the difference between two things....namely:
1.) the status of being 95% perfect
2.) being "perfect" as God in Heaven is perfect

JoJ....personally....I don't think you can speak of something like 95% perfection...as a non-linguist, I have a "linguistic objection" to your speaking this way.

The braying of the rear end of a donkey!:sleeping_2:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

The braying of the rear end of a donkey!:sleeping_2:

The "rear-ends" of donkeys don't "bray" Old Regular...
They "bray" from their mouths....Reverse the donkey, and your crass insult will work....

Of course...Baalam's donkey once prophesied....

 

[OldRegular]

The "rear-ends" of donkeys don't "bray" Old Regular...
They "bray" from their mouths....Reverse the donkey, and your crass insult will work....

Of course...Baalam's donkey once prophesied....

Apparently you don't understand so goes to show you are as smart as you think!

 

[humblethinker]

What I will do is reiterate a point of mine that I think is very relevant which you have not responded to. If philosophy is a source for knowledge about God, then all philosophy should be such, correct?

I would say that the only source of knowledge about God is revelation. Those things that are outside of revelation are arrived at by the influence of philosophical thinking. The point of the OP was to provoke people to consider that what they think they know is not necessarily arrived at via revelation only, but is in fact via philosophy. Case in point, augustine and calvinism being influenced through the neo-platonic philosophy. This is what this thread was for... you sir, have derailed it, wanting to argue symantics... you had made your point but really, it is an odd thing for you to carry on as you did. Have you at all answered the post? If you don't understand the post, then please just quit arguing. Have you offerred up some concepts that we westerners (or easterners if you insist) in general have about God that are contrary to revelation? This is exactly what I wanted to talk about in this thread. Again, you derailed the OP.

"If philosophy is a source of knowledge..." I did not say that it was in the sense that you are meaning it, you are the one making the proposition... I don't know why you are making it though, except maybe to argue against a strawman.

 

[humblethinker]

...frankly I don't think the genetic fallacy is always a fallacy.

The 'genetic fallacy' IS always a fallacy... that fact is embedded in the semantics of the phrase 'genetic fallacy'.

With my discussion of semantics I was just trying to clarify things. Saying "most perfect" or "more perfect" does communicate, it just does so poorly. So of course there are reasonable people here that understand the OP, because there are BB denizens that are highly educated and very intelligent. That fact is irrelevant to my linguistic objections.

Please clarify then, do you have linguistic objections to what you posted above? Is a 'genetic fallacy' not a 'fallacy'? Or, am I being uncharitable in holding you to such a strict standard? Perhaps you can provide a list of linguists who have used that phrase?

Once again you are asking me to discuss philosophy. I refuse to discuss the philosophical view of God. It's in error. Got it? If I answer the questions you are asking here, then I am discussing the philosophical view of God with you, right?

Got it? I'm not sure... which of these philosophical views of God is in error: the Arminian or the Calvinist? Are they strictly non-phylosophical views? My point in this whole thread is that all of us are influenced by philosophical thought of some degree regarding our view of God, the most perfect being. Are you not influenced by philosophical thinking regarding God?

And by the way, do you have any actual quotes from philosophers? Any that use the term “more perfect?” Because I don’t remember that phrase from any philosopher.

Did you forget or have you not ever read it?
Here's a google search for "most perfect being". JoJ, with a little more effort, here we can see that there are more than a few philosophers that use the exact phrase. Some of them are old, some of them are dead and some of them are white and I doubt that many of them are fundamentalists. The fact remains though, that they all knew what the phrase was intended to mean... and they did use it.