Perfection
Tuesday, 5. December 2006, 04:02:56
----------------------------
Okay, so I've been musing over the 'perfect' aspect of God. I'm going to say God allot but what I mean by it is 'deity'- any God, Goddess, or higher being that you might believe in. So most religions beleive that their God is the great magnificent being of perfection, right? However I've been thinking about perfection, and the general concept by itself, and I have to say it's really just a hypocritical flawed concept.
First of all, perfection is often a matter of opinion or in the very least a matter of perspective. So you could argue that God is omniscient, and knows exactly what is the perfect way of doing something at all times. However, I don't think that under any circumstances God would always be considered 'perfect' by anyone. Think of God as a lawyer right now, he has to determine the sentence for a murderer. No matter what God does, he is not going to be able to please everyone in that situation. Let's say God punishes the murderer in some way, I highly doubt that in most situations that the killer is going to be happy in what god decides. Now if he lets the killer go than the killer's victims family and friends, aren't going to be very happy, and God is not really going to be viewed as 'perfect'. So no matter what he does he's not always going to be veiwed as perfect.
So, really, God being viewed as perfect is really a matter of a persons point of veiw. So what? is what I thought at first when I realized this. So some people just won't see God's perfection. That's not the end of His/Her perfection.
But it really is. A perfect entity would be viewed as perfect by all people, because that would be part of it's state of perfection. If someone did not view God as perfect than that is not the ideal, or the perfect. So it detracts from God's 'perfection' since God can not present Itself in a 'perfect' way that makes that person believe that God is 'perfect'.
More problems persist for the simple concept of perfect. Their is only one way to be perfect, since only one way has the best effect on the world. So God would follow that way, and that way only. The problem with this is that, it removes the entire concept of freedom, which lessens, yet again, the concept of perfect.
I'll explain...
A perfect world would be free. Their would be no force to keep people moving, other than their own free will. However if something is perfect than they are no longer free. Instead they are tied to the concept of perfection, and whatever perfection does, they do. So they are not free, instead they are slaves to whatever is the perfect way.
Now they might, by chance, agree to be perfect. In that since, they personally have the freedom to stop being perfect, and regain their freedom, but the problem is, is that since they have chose to be perfect, and are thus in a state of perfection, they have lost all freedoms, by staying in that state. So a state of perfection has no freedom. Yet freedom is perfect. So without freedom, a 'perfect' state, can not be perfect. So perfection can't be free, so the perfect can't be perfect.
Now another problem with perfection is that it completely eradicates diversity. Let's go with God being perfect, again. If God is perfect than He himself would have one way of doing something and all other ways would be looked down upon. If that's the case than, their would be no diversity among him. He would stick to one way, and condemn all others.
Now at first my thought to this was, well don't we all do that? We all stick to one way that makes best sense to ourselves, and looks down upon all others. What's different when God does that?
The difference is that God is perfect, and there is only one ultamite form of perfection, while humans are imperfect, and there are many forms of imperfections, so perfect does not contain the diversity that imperfection does contain.
Now the hypocrisy here, is that perfect would be diverse, with many diverse ideas. However really, in a form of perfection than were all stuck to the same form of perfect (since there is only one way of perfection) and their fore their is no diversity and their fore perfect can't be perfect.
See, all these contradictions? So how can God be perfect, when the very concept of perfect is flawed? This has completly like whacked every beleif I've ever had in the face. So I'm not exactly sure what to beleive about God, or well the God and Goddess now. Are they perfect? Is that possible? Is any God perfect? Is freedom just not perfect? Is freedom bad?
I don't know.. I hope to answere how I throw this into my beleifs later. If this made any sence, please comment. :-D








dɹɐzılpǝkɔıw ɐʞɐ ɹǝɥgɐllɐg lǝbɐsı # 5. December 2006, 19:46
Randall # 28. December 2006, 01:42
Ok Amy.. lets see here. Define “Perfect”. I typed it into Google (“Define: Perfect”) & this is what it said: “being complete of its kind and without defect or blemish”. Notice it is Complete – not lacking anything…. But of it’s KIND. Therefore we all ready see there are many KINDS of things that can attain perfection. (diversity) Perfection can be absolute but it will relate to only ONE THING. (as you will see below) & it can also be RELATIVE when describing every OTHER thing.
For instance.. if I tell you my Television is Perfect! …does that mean it can toast bread? …of course not! What I mean is that, my television shows perfectly… has all the ports… & the most functional menus, etc. In other words.. it accomplishes the job/s it’s was MADE to do Perfectly. Yes my TV is Perfect… by the STANDARDS set for a TV to BE Perfect. (it still won’t make me breakfast
This obviously gets rid of the diversity issue you had… as every different KIND of thing can be perfect, considering it performs it’s job perfectly. It does not matter if we are smart enough to view the object or eternity (God) as perfect. It (or he in the case of God) will still be perfect, regardless.
I like the court case setting you used.. you said: “No matter what God does, he is not going to be able to please everyone in that situation.”
Yet Psalms 145:16 says: “You are opening your hand And satisfying the desire of every living thing.” (speaking of God of course) More than that… he does not HAVE to please Everyone.. he is God!.. WE should please HIM as his creation. ….and yet when we please him by obeying his commandments we not only make him happy but ourselves, because his orders are always in our best interest. (what would you expect from our first Father? Granted showing love to children is not always displayed by imperfect human fathers – but The Perfect God – the source of love, will always do so.)
(I will email you the rest of the info okay
Randall # 2. January 2007, 15:38
Amy # 14. January 2007, 20:41
dɹɐzılpǝkɔıw ɐʞɐ ɹǝɥgɐllɐg lǝbɐsı # 14. January 2007, 21:46
Randall # 14. January 2007, 22:14
David Scott Aubrey # 12. March 2007, 07:27
I've picked up a sort of mix of Spiritualism, Anglicanism and (believe it or not) Humanism over the years (which is why your 'pagan'ism is so interesting to me, by the way). Hey, humans are a paradox.
I used to believe that Jesus was a real, historical personage, but now I have my doubts (from various readings, I've been wondering if he could be a melange of three or four historical personages).
But it doesn't really matter in any case. The idea of Jesus (non-violence, love thy neighbour, forgive your enemy, etc) is (IMO) more important than whether he existed or not.
Nevertheless, the Anglican (Christian) 'side' of me says, "Yeah, pray and all that - ask and ye shall receive, right?"
But experience shows that that isn't the case. And simply looking around at the world further cements this experience. "Why does God allow bad things to happen?" and all that.
So ... I've been thinking about the idea of God answering (or not answering) prayers, and have come to the conclusion that God doesn't. And there are a couple of reasons why:
1) God isn't 'He', 'She', or whatever.
I'll use 'He' simply because I'm used to it and it facilitates communication on the topic, but I think God isn't the 'old guy with a beard' I used to see Him as ... but more of a force of nature.
Something beyond the ideas (the anthropomorphization) that humans pin Him down with.
Some sort of instigator that brought the universe into being (the Big Bang, string theory, intelligent design ... all that), then sat back to let the universe get on all by itself - thus allowing free will.
2) God doesn't answer prayers because - if He did - he'd have to answer everyone's prayers, lest the non-answering of those prayers indicate that His love might not be equal for everyone, which invalidates the whole 'Perfect God' idea (or, at least, the human-oriented concept of that).
Even if that weren't the case - and I don't know if it is or not at the moment because I'm having trouble keeping up with what I'm going on about
Sure, people can rely on the idea of God (faith is helpful for people), but being reliant upon God is a different thing altogether.
Human nature being what it is, most prayers (if answered each time) would ultimately follow a pattern something like this:
- God, please help me out of debt.
- God, thanks for helping me out of debt. Please help me get a house.
- God, thanks for the house. Can I have a boat and a better car?
- God, thanks for all that ... how about a big-screen TV? It's just that Billy Jones down the road has one and I really need one now, too!
- God! Well done on the TV! How about some food, or something?
- God! How'd you know I liked pizza? Good stuff! Listen ... I've got an itch on my back that I just can't reach ...
... and so on and so forth.
It would get to the point that people wouldn't do anything for themselves - they'd just ask God to do it for them.
Following this line of reasoning, people would have no need to challenge themselves, to better themselves - to improve themselves personally and as part of the community and as part of the species (which - when you think about it - would throw up questions of free will again).
Okay - as an aside - sure, there's people who believe God answered their prayers. To that, I say, "Good on you". But is it true?
Is there any proof of undeniable miracles? Or is it more likely that there are simply things science can't yet explain? Or (more likely) a lack of factual reporting of the 'miracle'? And in the end, does it really matter?
Belief in God, belief in the self - faith in something - can be a good thing, which can help us improve and grow.
Another aside is the whole, "It's in the Bible" argument.
"It's the Word of God, man!"
Which, of course, was cobbled together around 3 AD at the council of Nicea from various writings - some of which were left out (possibly) arbitrarily.
Which, of course, can be refuted by people more learned than me.
Which, of course, can be refuted by people more learned than them.
Which, of course ...
Okay ... I wonder what the point of all this rambling of mine was?
Oh ... that's right ...
I know that I'm a bit happier in myself since figuring out that God takes a more impersonal approach to the universe, simply because the disappointment that follows expectations not being met (unanswered prayers) has been removed from my life (not that I've prayed in some time, but there you go).
It hasn't crushed my beliefs, or anything, though. I'm not suffering any sort of 'crisis of faith' as some people might think I would.
I still believe in the afterlife (from experience). I still believe that we're all here for a reason. I still believe that God exists and actually does care about His creations.
But I now also believe that it's really up to us - not God - to do the best we can with the lives we have.
In a strange way, it makes sense to say, "Otherwise - what's the point?"
Sorry this comment rambled on so much - happy thirtieth birthday by the way
I hope it was.
And (of course), I know that I'm not necessarily right.
It works for me at the moment, but that might change in the future. And (again, of course), it's not for everyone.
Oh, well ... I'll shut up now.
Amy # 12. March 2007, 15:19
Thanks David, that was a really good comment. I really loved the part about "God, I have this scratch on my back, that I just can't reach..."
You brought up two good points. First, that God can't have a gender and that God can't answere all prayers. It wouldn't be perfect. (but than again who the hell knows what perfect is?).
Actually, I've been thinking about God's 'gender' for a while now and I have never been comfortable giving God a gender, and just recently I figured out why. At first it was some sort of feminist thing of mine. ("God can't be a guy! That's sexist!") Now, I have an actual reason. I'm going to proably going to do a post on it soon...
Randall # 12. March 2007, 20:14
Okay first up since we all have a background in Christianity I will use the Bible as the authority & quote from it freely. (After all to bring back faith in God we’ll need common sense, deductive logic, & a spiritual book to fill in the things we never would have thought of ourselves.)
God & Gender: When we speak of God we say “He” & nothing is wrong with this. As humans we think in terms of gender. Further in many languages when we DON’T know the gender of something we use the Male version of the word.
Men are more ‘powerful’ & have a greater measure of physical control by nature. Therefore if we want to speak of an ALL Powerful God we naturally would use the closest expression – “He” & not “She” as it would imply weakness (in terms of physical strength) on God's part.
Also when we speak of God & use the word “He” we don’t mean a Man – we mean a Spirit Creature. Even Jesus said at John 4:24 – “God is a Spirit”
Spirit Creatures Gender-less – Jesus when speaking to unbelievers at Matthew 22:30 said “in the resurrection (yet to happen in the future) neither do men marry nor are women given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven.”
What does he mean? That at that time those men & women who rise from the dead will have no desire to marry, effectively making them gender-less – like the “angels in heaven”.
Is Jesus a Real Historical Person? – Did you know: “The works of Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus, Pliny the Younger, and a few other classical writers include numerous references to Jesus. Of them, The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1995) says: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.”
Sadly, modern scholars, in their quest for the “real” or “historical” Jesus, seem to have hidden his true identity behind layers of baseless speculation, pointless doubts, and unfounded theorizing. In a sense, they are guilty of the mythmaking of which they falsely accuse the Gospel writers. Some are so eager to feed their own reputation and to link their name to a startling new theory that they fail to examine honestly the evidence about Jesus. In the process, they create a “Jesus” that amounts to a figment of scholarly imagination.”
In his Union Bible Companion, published in 1871, S. Austin Allibone presented a challenge to skeptics. He wrote: “Ask any one who professes to doubt the truth of the Gospel history what reason he has for believing that Cæsar died in the Capitol, or that the Emperor Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West by Pope Leo III. in 800? . . . We believe all the assertions . . . made respecting these men; and that because we have historical evidence of their truth. . . . If, on the production of such proof as this, any still refuse to believe, we abandon them as stupidly perverse or hopelessly ignorant. What shall we say, then, of those who, notwithstanding the abundant evidence now produced of the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures, profess themselves unconvinced? . . . They do not wish to believe that which humbles their pride, and will force them to lead different lives.”
The point is we have more non-biblical evidence supporting Jesus historicity than many world rulers. – If we are to deny HIM a place in history – then are we not non-existent ourselves! After all – no one ever wrote anything about my Grandfather!
Does it matter if he was real or not? – His teachings alone can inspire you to “do the right thing” & become a better person. However he did not transform from “Gods’ Son” as a spirit person in the heavens to human life on this earth for nothing! After Adam & Eve sinned & condemned us to a prospect of death after a few short years – God has allowed his Son to be a “Saviour” for mankind, provided we listen & apply his words in our lives!
John 17:3 “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.”
In other words – if Jesus is not real.. we have no redeemer to bring us back to everlasting life – the life God intended for us originally.
"Why does God allow bad things to happen?" – Yes.. he allows it. But is not the CAUSE of it… after all – “For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone.” (James 1:13)
If you had a child that was sick & you knew there was a vaccine for that ailment. Would you deny your child the treatment because the needle hurts?? Surly you will feel pained as your child undergoes the treatment but you will ALLOW it because it helps in the long run.
Likewise God allows this marred existence because it works out for all our benefit in the long run.
If God were to bring about the end of this system NOW & I mean NOW, what will have to happen? Would he not have to get rid of all the Bad men (& other things) who cause mankind in general to feel pain? – but it is more than that, those who will be removed are not just “Bad” men in terms of Murderers etc. but all those who “do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus” (2 Thessalonians – 1:6) they are considered “Bad” also because they had the chance to listen to him but were ignorant.
So Question! – are you & I ready for God’s Day to come? Will we be viewed as part of the problem or as something precious to be saved?? This is why God is allowing ample time for us to get to know him before his day of vengeance comes. Of course at no given time will everyone on earth support his way of life!-(that is before his "Great Day - right now) But only God in his jurisdiction can say when the world’s population has had enough warning & it is time. (those who did not have the chance to know God because of some circumstance will be saved or brought back to life & provided with a chance to know him at a later date. (according to Acts 24:15 & other supporting scripture.)
Does God Answer Prayer? Most Certainly. Psalms 65:2 calls him the “Hearer of Prayer” he would have to be a Person to Hear Prayer & NOT a force as some believe. …but does he Answer? Well in the Bible book of Daniel – Daniel himself was under immense stress & prayed to God about the outcome of God’s people. He himself relates: “while I was yet speaking in the prayer, why, the man Ga´briel, (an angel) whom I had seen in the vision at the start, having been made weary with tiredness, was arriving by me at the time of the evening gift offering.”
Imagine that! At once God sent his angel to answer Daniel’s prayer! God does not send angles to speak with us directly as in those days though. But the point is, He does answer us in his own way… no words may be needed – he may just cause the circumstance that is bothering us to go away or give us the power to cope & prevail against it. He does not have to answer us right away either! In some cases (as you can imagine) it would not be wise to find out the whole truth there & then! He will answer us in a time that will benefit us the most. (In Daniel’s case, it happened to be before he even finished praying!
Reliance on God & Answering Prayer: – If we pray ‘too much’ as it were, is that a bad thing??
Psalms 55:22 says “Throw your burden upon Jehovah (God) himself, And he himself will sustain you” so he WANTS us to rely on him! We were not made to “direct our own step” (Jeremiah 10:23)
If God IS all powerful... will answering EVERYONE’S prayer be a problem? "Is anything too extraordinary for Jehovah (God)?" Certainly not. (Genesis 18:14)
If he is all wise… does he HAVE to answer EVERYONE’S prayers? Of course not. 1 John 5:14 says – “And this is the confidence that we have toward him (God), that, no matter what it is that we ask according to his will, he hears us”
This means that for our prayers to be answered they have to be in accord with his will! Or righteous standards!
Is getting a new car in accord with his will? That depends! What do you need the car for?? If the car will allow you to pick up your family from a dangerous neighbourhood – then this is a good thing! He will listen to you & if you have faith you may get it! (note it may not even BE a new car.. but maybe he will make a friend provide an easy means of transport for them? He can work the problem in many ways.
What if you want a new car just because you think it’s cool?
When we Rely on God that does NOT make us totally helpless! For instance you rely on your boss for a salary each month don’t you?? Are you completely helpless?? Why no! you are a hard worker! Reliance on God gets us through circumstance that would otherwise be impossible to face alone & because God makes us WORK in accordance with our prayers we come out stronger not weak. (we cannot pray & then sit back & expect things to fall into place – we must try as we normally would to get the job done & God will ‘open up doors’ along the way that would normally be closed.)
It’s a Miracle!! – What is it? Why should I care?? – Isn’t a Miracle an event of divine origin that is awe-inspiring, for the fact that the viewer cannot comprehend the way it is brought about? Yes.
“Skeptics view a miracle as a violation of laws they accept as natural, irrevocable, inexorable; therefore, they say, a miracle never occurs.
If I told a man from the distant past that we have machines weighing a few tons that fly through the air at great speeds!
Likewise, God is a Scientist of the highest order – the one who made the natural laws we live by - & he can use them in countless untold ways to accomplish whatever he wills. It is foolish to doubt that which we don’t understand – in that case, Math class would have never existed for me at all!
Congrats if you read all this
Amy # 12. March 2007, 22:56
Yup, I did read your entire comment! It was very cuool.
Now, my pizza for dinner has just arrived.
David Scott Aubrey # 13. March 2007, 00:46
I was basing my newly-forming opinion on only one or two books on the 'against' side, and hadn't really researched the other side (imagining that I pretty much knew 'the other side' from things I'd read and heard and suchlike throughout my life).
You've served to remind me that there are, of course, two sides to every story (or idea) and that I shouldn't just pay attention only to the side which support my ideas and preconceptions (thinking of those ideas as 'proof').
I like to think I'm open minded, but I should be a little more mindful, too!
Thanks! :UP:
David Scott Aubrey # 13. March 2007, 00:55
Also, you might find similar topics of interest in the Opera Debates and Discussions Forums.
Randall # 13. March 2007, 01:18
wow.. I never knew there was a world's longest blog!
Amy # 13. March 2007, 02:35