God decides to create and...

[MattersOfTheHeart]

Arguing from a single God that has no equal, that is utterly perfect, what really must happen if God creates something?

I've heard the loosely touted possibly knee jerk response that all God creates must be perfect if God is perfect, therefor God can not be perfect. (I'm aware of the POE)

Though after years of reflection I conclude it must be the opposite.

If perfect is to have any real and lasting meaning we ought not to assign it willy nilly to anything we fancy.
Something may be glorious in our eyes but that is to say we prefer it over something else, not that it represents what we truly feel is perfect.

With this in mind, how can a perfect being create anything perfect? Mustn't by rule of logic that thing created be some form lesser than the perfect creator? Else if not, the creator perpetually just makes itself over and over. Yet that's not what we observe as reality. We observe marvelous systems some very close to what we might call perfect and some very far away to which we ascribe chaos. Yet no one foolishly asserts true perfection to what can be observed, because it becomes an exercise in arguing subjectivism.

I'm not aware of a logical argument that supports a perfect creator being able to create something perfect. Hence, our universe exists without the need for its creator to not be perfect. At least from our limited perspective we can only perceive that which is either perfect or not. In our minds there is only room for one perfection, and to it we can only conjure up some God, not a sunset or cake or some such.

 

[Akivah]

You're right, G-d didn't make Creation to be perfect. This word is never used in the Tanakh to describe G-d's Creation. Instead, the text states that G-d's Creation is good. Indeed everything that G-d creates is good.

 

[Nietzsche]

You're right, G-d didn't make Creation to be perfect. This word is never used in the Tanakh to describe G-d's Creation. Instead, the text states that G-d's Creation is good. Indeed everything that G-d creates is good.

...

I didn't know there were fanclubs for smallpox, AIDs, polio and leprosy, but clearly I stand corrected.

 

[lovesong]

Mustn't by rule of logic that thing created be some form lesser than the perfect creator? Else if not, the creator perpetually just makes itself over and over. Yet that's not what we observe as reality.

Actually this is exactly how reality works, it's called reproduction.

In our minds there is only room for one perfection

Why?

 

[Demonslayer]

God is a lousy creator if you ask me. The first time around the humans he made were so badly flawed, he had to kill them all and start from scratch.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

You're right, G-d didn't make Creation to be perfect. This word is never used in the Tanakh to describe G-d's Creation. Instead, the text states that G-d's Creation is good. Indeed everything that G-d creates is good.

For me it goes a little further.
I don't see how God can create anything perfect.
All things must point to God as the only perfect "thing" perhaps so higher consciousness can see the need for God in existence.

 

[Desert Snake]

For me it goes a little further.
I don't see how God can create anything perfect.
All things must point to God as the only perfect "thing" perhaps so higher consciousness can see the need for God in existence.

Therefore?

I mean, supposing that your argument makes sense

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

Actually this is exactly how reality works, it's called reproduction.

i know what you mean by this statement.
But I'm trying to say that if God were going to create perfection it's only option is to create itself over and over, but we don't see that. We see products that aren't perfect with vetting degrees of shades etc...

Why?

based on experience, when a person is pressed to account for their inner thoughts and conclusions perfection is either something very singularly specific or else it's something vague that can be applied to dogs, cats, musicals etc...

We seem to innately know or share a broader idea of singular perfection. Usually something supernatural (even if we don't believe in supernatural, we tend to leave the ultimate perfection to such heights.)

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

God is a lousy creator if you ask me. The first time around the humans he made were so badly flawed, he had to kill them all and start from scratch.

This assumes it could have been done any other way.

Worth playing in your mind with. I'm not trying to be difficult, but rather open the possibility that God is also bound by certain realities, yet can still be flawless.

Many won't understand that, but it's true. Flawless doesn't mean God can't create something less than perfect, it simply means God is bound by only what God can do, in this case create less than perfect things.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

Therefore?

I mean, supposing that your argument makes sense

Therefor, the world as we see it is the only possible way it could have been. This answers lots of questions and accounts for many unknowns.

 

[Nietzsche]

This assumes it could have been done any other way.

Worth playing in your mind with. I'm not trying to be difficult, but rather open the possibility that God is also bound by certain realities, yet can still be flawless.

Many won't understand that, but it's true. Flawless doesn't mean God can't create something less than perfect, it simply means God is bound by only what God can do, in this case create less than perfect things.

So are you arguing God isn't omnipotent?

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

So are you arguing God isn't omnipotent?

He absolutely is in this understanding I'm presenting.

I'm aware how it seems not so, but being omnipotent only means God can do all things that are possible.

Many mistake it to mean God can create a better world than we see, but that's just fanciful play with words.

 

[Nietzsche]

He absolutely is in this understanding I'm presenting.

I'm aware how it seems not so, but being omnipotent only means God can do all things that are possible.

Many mistake it to mean God can create a better world than we see, but that's just fanciful play with words.

No. Omnipotent means that "impossible" isn't a thing for you. Being omnipotent means all things are possible.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

No. Omnipotent means that "impossible" isn't a thing for you. Being omnipotent means all things are possible.

No that's just not true.

Just because humans can put words together doesn't make it a real thing.

Example, I could type djdifjrbsjaiisrbrbdjdjsjsbdhjddnjsjd

And declare God can do it, whatever "it" is, but we both know that string of words is just nothing, it has no basis in reality.

Many want to ascribe to Omnipotent everything, even nonsense that means nothing, so they can better argue against it.

If you ponder on it for a while, you'll see that a square circle means nothing, and to say God can not make a square circle doesn't lessen Gods omninpotence.

Does that make sense?

 

[Nietzsche]

No that's just not true.

Just because humans can put words together doesn't make it a real thing.

Example, I could type djdifjrbsjaiisrbrbdjdjsjsbdhjddnjsjd

And declare God can do it, whatever "it" is, but we both know that string of words is just nothing, it has no basis in reality.

Many want to ascribe to Omnipotent everything, even nonsense that means nothing, so they can better argue against it.

If you ponder on it for a while, you'll see that a square circle means nothing, and to say God can not make a square circle doesn't lessen Gods omninpotence.

Does that make sense?

No, it does not, because omnipotence comes without limitations.

 

[Desert Snake]

Therefor, the world as we see it is the only possible way it could have been.

This answers lots of questions and accounts for many unknowns.

Such as?

 

[PackJason]

Why did god put the playground so close to the septic system?

 

[PackJason]

Can god sin?

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

No, it does not, because omnipotence comes without limitations.

I e given an example of how this isn't true. If you're not willing to consider something different then you're correct. Omnipotent means anything you want it to mean.
I can't argue with that.

However, most people schooled in this subject matter both theists and atheists understand the true nature of intrinsically logical and intrinsically illogical.

Guess you win this discussion.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

Can god sin?

God can not. his creation can or at least it's possible for creation to deviate from God.

Again, this underscores the nature of God creating something that isn't perfect. Many things are possible.