[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: REQUEST : RISHIS
In article <ghenDyotK9.42t@netcom.com>,
Joseph M. Emmanuel <maitreya@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:11:51 GMT, shrao@nyx.net (Shrisha Rao) wrote:
>
>>>These are not flaws. You chose to call them such. He is also Everything.
>>>So He is indeed All Forms, Names, Shapes, etc. My God Has No Flaws:).
>>
>>The main point is still not answered: wherefrom did you get the notion
>>that *if* there is an Omnipotent God, *then* he/she/it is formless?
>>What is the basis for this inference?
>
>Have you seen any Omnipotent God with form?
Yes.
>>Also, what is your notion of "flaw"? Perhaps if we can agree upon a
>>definition of the same, we can make progress towards an agreement
>>whether formlessness is a flaw or not, and whether something that is
>>formless can also be all forms, etc.
>If it is not Perfect, it has Flaws.
Then the definition of `flaw' must rest upon that of `perfect' -- so
what does the latter mean?
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> -Joseph (maitreya@worldnet.att.net)
