@clarafables I fear not the man who has read 10,000 books, but I fear the man who has read one book 10,000 times.
Especially if that book is by Plato, Aristotle or Aquinas.
Being myself is the hardest thing for me to be.
I too often want to be the perception that I present to others of myself. But that's merely what is perceived, not what is, i.e., the phenomenology of an object does not determine it's ontological existence.
I feel that becoming myself, and not the perception presented, would make me unlikable.
@Agratefulheart_ The complete works of Plato.
The complete works of Aristotle.
Suma Theological by Thomas Aquinas.
And various novels by Samuel Beckett to keep me grounding in the absurd and surreal.
@m966021 It's exceedingly difficult to define and describe God in non-abstract terms, as God is a metaphysical question that, at least in my opinion, can only be known a priori rather than a posteriori.
No?
@Nilsvilliam@PhysInHistory I'm pretty sure a group of physicists could figure our how to run a line of free beer into their living room.
Why else study physics if not for that reason alone?
That's a fair question.
I reply that, the New Testament establishes that Christians are not bound by the Mosaic Law as a covenant, e.g:
Acts 15;
Galatians 3:23β25
Its moral principles, however, are reaffirmed by Christ and the apostles, e.g:
Matthew 22:37β40;
Romans 13:8β10
So, the threefold classification is a theological framework, not an explicit biblical division.
Does this answer your query?
@Cloud_Journal I heard that most billionaires lead miserable lives anyway, which is why they surround themselves with mansions, fast cars and private jets as a way to comfort themselves.
Not that I'm jealous, of course.