How 'perfect' are you?

[Magic Man]

I'm not making up rules. I'm just saying that "you are" is the measure of perfection for "you are".

I was just kidding. The OP refers to "your religion", and since yours is "just you", then you make up all of the rules for your religion, and can therefore make the rules to make yourself perfect. That's all.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

Because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. Hebrews 10:14

 

[Troublemane]

On a scale of 1 to 100 (100 being highest), how 'perfect' would you say you are, according to your religion?

Do you mean perfect in terms of some ideal, or perfect in terms of how one is practicing their faith?

In terms of practicing my own faith I'd have to give myself a 3.14,....so I deserve Pie!

 

[Willamena]

But you can compare one person to another, or one apple to another.

That's still something it's not.

Edit: I can see that as a method to produce an ideal, something that's not either of the individuals, and against which either of them would fail. But a rotten apple in itself is the perfection of this particular rotten apple.

 

[Magic Man]

That's still something it's not.

Edit: I can see that as a method to produce an ideal, something that's not either of the individuals, and against which either of them would fail. But a rotten apple in itself is the perfection of this particular rotten apple.

I think this is the problem. Perfection is always an ideal. There is no such thing as a perfect thing. For instance, most people would say that for me to be perfect, I'd have to not make mistakes. Now, even if I were to achieve this, some things I do could be considered mistakes by some people, and, barring that, I wouldn't learn much. Although, I guess being perfect I'd have to already know everything.

On the other hand, if you use the phrase "perfect for something", it's different. My last dog was perfect for us. He had all of the traits that my wife and I could possibly want in a dog. So, to us he was the perfect dog, but that's only a subjective perfection. Other people would disagree with our conclusion that he was the perfect dog, and so he didn't actually achieve "perfection". That is impossible.

 

[Willamena]

I think this is the problem. Perfection is always an ideal. There is no such thing as a perfect thing. For instance, most people would say that for me to be perfect, I'd have to not make mistakes. Now, even if I were to achieve this, some things I do could be considered mistakes by some people, and, barring that, I wouldn't learn much. Although, I guess being perfect I'd have to already know everything.

On the other hand, if you use the phrase "perfect for something", it's different. My last dog was perfect for us. He had all of the traits that my wife and I could possibly want in a dog. So, to us he was the perfect dog, but that's only a subjective perfection. Other people would disagree with our conclusion that he was the perfect dog, and so he didn't actually achieve "perfection". That is impossible.

I agree, most people hold perfection to the ideal, and some to an even higher standard, and it makes little sense to do that. The ideal is something that the "actual" thing can never be, and then what is the point of perfection if only to point at the imperfection, as if it's somehow "wrong" in not being something it could never be? In my view, it is what it is; and oddly enough, it is precisely what it is; and more so, it is exactly what it is --and there is no "imperfection" in the meanings of "precision" or "exactitude".

I am more akin to those who say there is no perfection of being, because my understanding makes it a superfluous concept whose only purpose is to find fault. The "subjective perfection" is a much more useful (and constructive) concept than the former.

 

[Magic Man]

I agree, most people hold perfection to the ideal, and some to an even higher standard, and it makes little sense to do that. The ideal is something that the "actual" thing can never be, and then what is the point of perfection if only to point at the imperfection, as if it's somehow "wrong" in not being something it could never be? In my view, it is what it is; and oddly enough, it is precisely what it is; and more so, it is exactly what it is --and there is no "imperfection" in the meanings of "precision" or "exactitude".

I am more akin to those who say there is no perfection of being, because my understanding makes it a superfluous concept whose only purpose is to find fault. The "subjective perfection" is a much more useful (and constructive) concept than the former.

:yes:

 

[Magic Man]

By the way, Willamena, I just looked up perfect in the dictionary, and one of the definitions was (the complete quote) "Exact; Precise". I agree with your interpretation of it, but I just thought that was funny.

 

[dawny0826]

I believe that perfection is really only something that we can strive for.

But it's great fun to pretend!

 

[logician]

"Perfection" is in the mind of the observer, and as such only has meaning to same.

 

[Heneni]

Be ye perfect as god is perfect the bible says. And it says this round about the same place where it says 'love your enemies'. God is very good at loving the imperfect. And that is what perfection is. Loving perfectly that which is imperfect. A mother who has a child born without arms is able to see the child as perfect simply because she is able to love the imperfect perfectly. Therefore we become perfect by the measure that we come to love the imperfect.

Some of the final words jesus spoke on the cross was 'forgive them father for they know not what they have done'. He loved the imperfect perfectly.

While we were still sinners Jesus died for us. He would not and could not have done that if he was not able to love the imperfect perfectly. And his love is what makes us perfect, not we ourselves. The child with no arms is not perfect but can be whole simply by being loved perfectly by those around him and himself.

Our problem is not that we need to become perfect, what we have to do is start to love our imperfect selves. The curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, I can change. When i love the imperfect me and accept the imperfect me, i have the courage to do just about anything.

How do we love god then? He is perfect! Our love for a perfect being is completely imperfect! And god knows this. We know that our partners, our mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters have faults, but we love them anyway. Their humanity makes them more lovable actually. But god, what about god? There is no imperfections in god. He is perfect. So how do we love the perfect, perfectly? Well that is a tricky one... so there really is only one way to show the perfect that you love him perfectly, you obey his commandments. And what is the commandment? To love him! LOL! How do we love God? Well, i have thought about this long and hard, and i have concluded that to not find any pleasure in god is to show him dishonour and not love him. And this kind of love, the love that is shown by the imperfect towards the perfect is a mystery. Perhaps that is why we will always need grace and mercy.

How perfect do I think i am.... not perfect at all, but completely perfectly loved by god, therefore in his eyes, wholely perfect, though in my own im not.

So i have concluded that in order to love myself perfectly...i need to accept who god thinks i am, to have the corouge to change.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Obviously, Angellous is perfect in the strictest possible degree that is reasonably applicable to one who is not divine.

 

[Heneni]

Obviously, Angellous is perfect in the strictest possible degree that is reasonably applicable to one who is not divine.

Yes, indeed, it would be inappropriate if daddy was not divine

 

[MoonWater]

On a scale of 1 to 100 I would say N/A as the concept of perfection is a concept that I do not hold to.

 

[Quagmire]

According to my beliefs the only perfect people are perfect strangers and perfect idiots, and we all know each other.