Response To https://twitter.com/CrispySea/status/745523357827772416

To me, the phrase "potential agenda conflicts" seems a bit more meaningful to our discussion than "issues", so I'll respectfully use it in this response.

Such conflicts do not seem unique to the human experience. Throughout reality, components thereof seem generally accepted to potential conflict. The key difference among them seems to be their level of self-determination.

Reality below a certain level of self-determination seems generally accepted to have a set of programmed responses that seems to establish comparative right-of-way, and therefore immediately resolve conflicts. Equal, conflicting rights-of-way seems to have no resolution but impasse.

A greater level of self-determination seems to allow initial impasse to be overcome via intellectually-identified right-of-way guidelines, rather than via physically programmed right-of-way guidelines.

To me, logic seems to suggest that limited, fallible human perception might not always identify the optimal comparative right-of-way determination. However the apparently order-normative characteristic of reality seems to suggest that an optimal comparative right-of-way determination exists. The apparently Biblically proposed, omniscient authority over reality seems Biblically and reasonably suggested to be aware of that determination and supremely interested in conveying that information and interested in the effecting of that solution.

The sole impedance to optimal conflict resolution seems to be whether the humans involved will use their self-determination to choose to place faith in that omniscient authority and abide by that optimal determination. To the extent that one or more humans chooses a less-than-optimal option, agenda conflict (apparently not necessarily a problem) then, and perhaps only then, seems to transform into social harm.

To me, the Bible seems to suggest that acceptance of God as primary relationship and sovereign authority can even shape human thought so that even agenda conflict is intuitively avoided, and not perceived. Human self-determination remains exercised via the voluntary choice to accept God as primary relationship and sovereign authority while employing the advantage of God's omniscient and supremely benevolent guidance.

To me, some seem to suggest this God/human relationship dynamic to be demeaning to human intellect, but humans seem to employ that dynamic themselves in forms such as human government and GPS.