Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
I haven't read MFM's thread, but it seems you are assuming there is only one perfection, which I don't think can be justified. If we imagine a perfect circle, and a perfect sphere, it's evident that both can be examples of perfection without being identical.
As I said, I mean Perfect in the Anselmian sense, which many Christians enthusiastically endorse, that is, "the conception of God as the greatest conceivable being." Can anything be greater than that? How about an infinite number of greatest conceivable beings?
It seem there is a re occouring theme in your threads, in that it seem that you believe the bible to have originally written in English and that it must be read interpreted and accepted only from the English.
The Hebrew word for "perfect" when used to describe God is
tamiym
Pronunciation
tä·mēm'
It means:
complete, whole, entire, sound
complete, whole, entire
whole, sound, healthful
complete, entire (of time)
sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact
The word in The Greek is:Transliteration
teleioō
Pronunciation
te-lā-o'-ō (Key)
It means
to make perfect, complete
to carry through completely, to accomplish, finish, bring to an end
to complete (perfect)
add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full
to be found perfect
to bring to the end (goal) proposed
to accomplish
bring to a close or fulfilment by event
of the prophecies of the scriptures.
You are trying to force this English defination of the words used above to describe God:
a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless <a perfect diamond>
b : satisfying all requirements : accurate
c : corresponding to an ideal standard or abstract concept <a perfect gentleman>
d : faithfully reproducing the original; specifically : letter-perfect
e : legally valid
With that in mind I now ask why can't God be good and perfect?
its not a matter of semantics
its rational thinking
let me emphasize: he was saying that in order for something to be perfect, his outcome must also come to be perfect.
If the painting is bad, then its a bad painter, but if a painting is good, then the painter is good.
January 9, 2014 at 6:10 pm (This post was last modified: January 9, 2014 at 6:13 pm by Angrboda.)
(January 9, 2014 at 5:10 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:
(January 9, 2014 at 1:19 pm)rasetsu Wrote: I haven't read MFM's thread, but it seems you are assuming there is only one perfection, which I don't think can be justified. If we imagine a perfect circle, and a perfect sphere, it's evident that both can be examples of perfection without being identical.
As I said, I mean Perfect in the Anselmian sense, which many Christians enthusiastically endorse, that is, "the conception of God as the greatest conceivable being." Can anything be greater than that? How about an infinite number of greatest conceivable beings?
Then your argument doesn't make sense, because either you're equivocating on the meaning of perfection, or asserting that a maximally great perfection cannot create a lesser perfection, which has no foundation in anything you've said. Correction, you assert that only God can be perfect. However this appears as little more than a bare assertion, to which I've already provided counter-examples. It looks like you're equivocating.
January 9, 2014 at 7:36 pm (This post was last modified: January 9, 2014 at 7:38 pm by Mudhammam.)
(January 9, 2014 at 6:10 pm)rasetsu Wrote: Then your argument doesn't make sense, because either you're equivocating on the meaning of perfection, or asserting that a maximally great perfection cannot create a lesser perfection, which has no foundation in anything you've said. Correction, you assert that only God can be perfect. However this appears as little more than a bare assertion, to which I've already provided counter-examples. It looks like you're equivocating.
Is anything but equivocation possible when God is the subject? My argument is that God could create NOTHING but imperfections, using an idea of Perfection, however vague, that has been argued and defended by philosophical theology for centuries. Whether or not it was coherent to begin with, well, you'd have to take that up with anyone who has adopted Anselm's ontological argument over the last millenium. You offered two examples of Perfection but clearly theologians don't define God as a geometric shape.
(January 9, 2014 at 5:10 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: As I said, I mean Perfect in the Anselmian sense, which many Christians enthusiastically endorse, that is, "the conception of God as the greatest conceivable being." Can anything be greater than that? How about an infinite number of greatest conceivable beings?
Then your argument doesn't make sense, because either you're equivocating on the meaning of perfection, or asserting that a maximally great perfection cannot create a lesser perfection, which has no foundation in anything you've said. Correction, you assert that only God can be perfect. However this appears as little more than a bare assertion, to which I've already provided counter-examples. It looks like you're equivocating.
I haven't read MFM's thread, but it seems you are assuming there is only one perfection, which I don't think can be justified. If we imagine a perfect circle, and a perfect sphere, it's evident that both can be examples of perfection without being identical.
The reason I thought he was talking about what I did in my thread was because he brought up perfection and God's ability to create things. However, my thread is a counter-apologetic, the "Platonic-Theodicy Dilemma".
January 10, 2014 at 12:05 am (This post was last modified: January 10, 2014 at 12:30 am by Cinjin.)
(January 9, 2014 at 1:07 am)Drich Wrote:
Meh...
It seem there is a re occouring theme in your threads, in that it seem that you believe the bible to have originally written in English and that it must be read interpreted and accepted only from the English.
The Hebrew word for "perfect" when used to describe God is
tamiym
Pronunciation
tä·mēm'
It means:
complete, whole, entire, sound
complete, whole, entire
whole, sound, healthful
complete, entire (of time)
sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact
The word in The Greek is:Transliteration
teleioō
Pronunciation
te-lā-o'-ō (Key)
It means
to make perfect, complete
to carry through completely, to accomplish, finish, bring to an end
to complete (perfect)
add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full
to be found perfect
to bring to the end (goal) proposed
to accomplish
bring to a close or fulfilment by event
of the prophecies of the scriptures.
You are trying to force this English defination of the words used above to describe God:
a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless <a perfect diamond>
b : satisfying all requirements : accurate
c : corresponding to an ideal standard or abstract concept <a perfect gentleman>
d : faithfully reproducing the original; specifically : letter-perfect
e : legally valid
With that in mind I now ask why can't God be good and perfect?
My god was not able to translate his own language into English.
January 10, 2014 at 12:07 am (This post was last modified: January 10, 2014 at 2:02 am by Mudhammam.)
To put it another way: God is defined as the greatest conceivable being; therefore everything else that exists is less than the greatest conceivable being. But if all actuality is created by God and less than the greatest, God's acts aren't the greatest and therefore an even greater conceivable being could exist: a being who only creates the greatest conceivable beings.
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
January 10, 2014 at 2:01 am (This post was last modified: January 10, 2014 at 2:08 am by Drich.)
(January 9, 2014 at 5:15 pm)xr34p3rx Wrote:
(January 9, 2014 at 1:07 am)Drich Wrote: Meh...
It seem there is a re occouring theme in your threads, in that it seem that you believe the bible to have originally written in English and that it must be read interpreted and accepted only from the English.
The Hebrew word for "perfect" when used to describe God is
tamiym
Pronunciation
tä·mēm'
It means:
complete, whole, entire, sound
complete, whole, entire
whole, sound, healthful
complete, entire (of time)
sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact
The word in The Greek is:Transliteration
teleioō
Pronunciation
te-lā-o'-ō (Key)
It means
to make perfect, complete
to carry through completely, to accomplish, finish, bring to an end
to complete (perfect)
add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full
to be found perfect
to bring to the end (goal) proposed
to accomplish
bring to a close or fulfilment by event
of the prophecies of the scriptures.
You are trying to force this English defination of the words used above to describe God:
a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless <a perfect diamond>
b : satisfying all requirements : accurate
c : corresponding to an ideal standard or abstract concept <a perfect gentleman>
d : faithfully reproducing the original; specifically : letter-perfect
e : legally valid
With that in mind I now ask why can't God be good and perfect?
its not a matter of semantics
its rational thinking
let me emphasize: he was saying that in order for something to be perfect, his outcome must also come to be perfect.
If the painting is bad, then its a bad painter, but if a painting is good, then the painter is good.
make sense?
When does 'rational thinking' exclude the context of a given passage when said thinking is to be focused on said passage?
If the passage is not written in English and the English only interpretation reveals a paradox of some kind then rational thinking dictates a need to examine the passage in its orginal form therefore semantics are needed for proper exegesis?
The only 'rational' reason to exclude 'semantics' when one comes across a contradiction or paradox is the preservation of said contradiction or paradox as a way to change the meaning of a given text. As such your efforts cease to be 'rational' by definition, and then wander into the realm of propaganda or even out right lies.
(January 10, 2014 at 12:07 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: To put it another way: God is defined as the greatest conceivable being; therefore everything else that exists is less than the greatest conceivable being. But if all actuality is created by God and less than the greatest, God's acts aren't the greatest and therefore an even greater conceivable being could exist: a being that only creates the greatest conceivable beings.
-or if one filters this paradox through what is actually written about God in the bible it would read as follows:
God is perfect in that He is complete and lacks nothing. He can/has created beings and places as complete as He is complete. Yet has seen fit to give said beings an oppertunity to either remain complete or fall from this embodiment of completion.
(January 10, 2014 at 12:05 am)Cinjin Wrote:
(January 9, 2014 at 1:07 am)Drich Wrote:
Meh...
It seem there is a re occouring theme in your threads, in that it seem that you believe the bible to have originally written in English and that it must be read interpreted and accepted only from the English.
The Hebrew word for "perfect" when used to describe God is
tamiym
Pronunciation
tä·mēm'
It means:
complete, whole, entire, sound
complete, whole, entire
whole, sound, healthful
complete, entire (of time)
sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact
The word in The Greek is:Transliteration
teleioō
Pronunciation
te-lā-o'-ō (Key)
It means
to make perfect, complete
to carry through completely, to accomplish, finish, bring to an end
to complete (perfect)
add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full
to be found perfect
to bring to the end (goal) proposed
to accomplish
bring to a close or fulfilment by event
of the prophecies of the scriptures.
You are trying to force this English defination of the words used above to describe God:
a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless <a perfect diamond>
b : satisfying all requirements : accurate
c : corresponding to an ideal standard or abstract concept <a perfect gentleman>
d : faithfully reproducing the original; specifically : letter-perfect
e : legally valid
With that in mind I now ask why can't God be good and perfect?
My god was not able to translate his own language into English.
Poor cinny still struggles with basic comprehension of the way things are translated. Do you need me to go over it again with you?
![[Image: 10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg]](https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg)
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
![[Image: Evolution.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk619%2Fjcincain%2FPublic%2FEvolution.png)
![[Image: DrichTranslator_zps2bc0498e.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk619%2Fjcincain%2FPublic%2FDrichTranslator_zps2bc0498e.png)
