I got that but we the people are not yet to understand how He factors It all in, including Himself/himself in as well/ well.
Presuming anyone could understand the guy who was supposed to have realized , it could not.(Cantor)
Are you asking if anything created/finite can truly bear the image of the creator/infinite, or if there can logically be a Godman, or if an imperfect person can really be given/granted/seen with his perfection?
Is it something for another thread? I know we’ve already discussed it… but… of course… we always need reminding, don’t we? 
Woke uo just now .so just letting You know of the last part’s attended to possible response.
That no even this belongs in this forum. Today Sunday, time will not allow a proper attention to respond today.
But thinking
about it to formulate one.
…and that’s not merely nome’s excuse, it’s part of the response responsible for.
Bear with me.
It is a difficult question and You may want to know that I am a captured slave to difficulty, while abiding to conditional conditions of The Deal.
I forgive you.
.The psychological content has morphed unexpectedly into significantly broader perimeters of socially relevance
And as the familial and the familiar progressively de-differentiate , larger çontentions may be made of the all inclusive substance of contention.
_
Writing a biography on them huh? I see you, I see you, 
In a way yes, but included other ways of approach,and my god, there are so many.
The range is phenomenally wide, and to begin with, people are obsessed with them, personally as their fortunes vacillate with the fortune of the British monarchy it’s self there is a strange resonance going on .
As You are from there, You may thoughts about it, what’s going on, how everything will be effected( You brought this up in a prior comment ,although not in those words) or would You downplay this era they call the passing of the second Elizabethan age , as nothing more than a transitory over the top ( hysterical?) reaction in Great Britain?
In a way yes, but included other ways of approach,and my god, there are so many.
The range is phenomenally wide, and to begin with, people are obsessed with them, personally as their fortunes vacillate with the fortune of the British monarchy it’s self there is a strange resonance going on .
As You are from there, You may thoughts about it, what’s going on, how everything will be effected( You brought this up in a prior comment ,although not in those words) or would You downplay this era they call the passing of the second Elizabethan age , as nothing more than a transitory over the top ( hysterical?) reaction in Great Britain?
Or, even , such atmosphere may extend toward global ramifications involvolving the other major players in global affairs?
Sorrily I have not yet read the ‘Global Affair’s forum’ and if reading that could answer my inquiry , then please tell me
I am pleased MagsJ , that I can bypass the appearance of playing hyde and go seek: or vampiristically put :Jekyll and Hyde.
but seriously there is no telling how this forum’ may appear as a different sort of biography even if it may end up as some …citation to a citation.
LONDON (AP) —
The cannons have sounded, the bells have rung and the mourners have paid their respects.
Now King Charles III faces the task of preserving a 1,000-year-old monarchy that his mother nurtured for seven decades but that faces an uncertain future. The challenge is immense.
Personal affection for the queen meant that the monarchy’s role in British society was rarely debated in recent years. But now that she’s gone, the royal family faces questions about whether it is still relevant in a modern, multicultural nation that looks very different than it did when Elizabeth ascended the throne in 1952.
Amid a global re-examination of the history of colonialism and slavery that has seen protesters tear down or deface statues in British cities and universities like Oxford and Cambridge change their course offerings, an institution that was once the symbol of the British Empire is likely to face renewed scrutiny.
Charles will try to “maintain continuity” while also signaling that the royals are prepared to change, said Anna Whitelock, a professor of history of modern monarchy at City University London. But he faces a raft of questions.
“What place does a monarchy have in a multi-faith, multi-ethnic society?” Whitelock asked. “And is it the right rallying point for the nation? And should it be the monarch representing the U.K. abroad? What does it say about us? Is it a bastion of tradition that people should applaud? Or is it actually a check on progress that actually doesn’t represent the inclusive, diverse society that people would hope that Britain would now become?”
AP
And thanks for your comments in advance although not binding.
This thing is beginning to resemble a tug of war between a Hollywood sitcom and a Greek tragedy according to the ground that a republic was built.
hello for Hollywood but Hollywood is but a film of a holly tree.
However 1776 is far behind a mere 250 years yet olive trees go back to Via Appia Do roots wither faster then film burns under the hot sun of memories fade.
Can exceptionalism of Brit royal escape the invasive film that continental divide that identity politics played havoc with languages diversity to define as incorrigible.
The Baltic roots so close to mother Russe had danced to the spectre de la rose an ignoble effort to merge boyar and serf.
Nijinski the face of Rasputin or the other way around .
Further ramification as to how the earlier abdication and marriage of the king led to such divide with similar tableaux
of notice. That spectre was noticed even by adolf, pertaining to a different kind of rose , one having reference to the Baltics becoming a focal point of attention.
The first world war cast a shadow on the flower, the evil of which became visible with an assesination of an archduke.
That was a symptom of an underlying malady that too has deep roots in monarchy. The power within clashes without,awareness, and this is how the fire explodes from within. That the left leaning Rex abdication lead to national socialism is without a doubt need not rise to evidentiary logic, that is, without becoming a question of proof against a synthetic a priort.
To be sure, that doubt to sufficient reason can never the less reduce to an alogarythm of despair, hence the explosion from within blazing as a light eternal to out , thru out the region.
That is the spectre that the flower, virag fleur cast on the continental divided explosion
Did it cast a wide shadow that still cut away but persists strongly as if the myth of the rose can recur.
That’s a heuristic nightmare unpleasant to even imagine nowadays to say the least.
The Big Fear, well one of them
That entitlement won’t go gradually like felled heads afforded by a two edged blade, into a publicly displayed basket, so as to diminish contrast between CAPITAL and it’s utilization. The Fed will loose it before Putin can clear his head to make up His mind about tactical nukes.
And China is estopped from stealing intel goods.
_
Kate was lambasted just as much, as Megan is now being… they stopped harassing Kate when Megan came along.
I bet Kate was relieved about that, in Megan taking the heat off of her. 
When Kate married William, the jealousy of women world-wide was insane, then when William started losing his hair they back-tracked and said she was welcome to him. 
Hahaha!
Wondering how that relates to my very early forum’ on ’ jealousy’s?
…easily. 
Even women in remote parts of the world know who Prince Harry and Prince William are, and whom too had lofty ideals of ‘marrying a Prince’… so a world of seething women, jealous of Megan and Kate.
I knew there were two princes, but I didn’t know which was which. I knew at least one was married, and did not know the difference between Kate & Meghan (that there were two of them). I think y’all maybe either hold false assumptions or this confirms I’m a weirdo.