(October 7, 2021 at 4:14 pm)ayost Wrote: I am defending the Biblical God. You defined a concept outside the Bible and then measured God inside the Bible with that concept.
I'm sorry, it just doesn't reflect the Biblical picture of God's perfection.
I've used a standard definition of perfection. If you're trying to smuggle in some secret special meaning of the word that doesn't align with the way it is used in common English and can be endlessly malleable based on whatever argument you are defending, you aren't engaging in a good faith discussion. And you certainly can't justifiably accuse me of attacking a strawman by assuming you are applying the English meaning of the word.
Quote:I agree God needs nothing.
If by "want" you mean lack, I agree, He lacks nothing.
But if by want you mean desire, well "desiring nothing" isn't part of the definition of perfect. According to the Bible, God is perfect and has all kinds of desires. But he doesn't desire imperfectly like you or I. He doesn't hope or wish or dream. He isn't lacking something he desires.
I'm sorry, but that is just absurd. How can you desire something if you have everything you need and want? To desire is to intensely want something you lack. So yes, I agree with you that the God of the Bible is presented as having all kinds of desires. He is also called perfect. My point is that these descriptions are not consistent and cannot be made consistent without redefining the concept of desire or perfection. If one does that, it is disingenuous to continue using those words as if everyone understands what is meant.
Quote:No one ever said God has goals. He has a will and He acts perfectly with perfect intention to do everything according to His will the first time. Maybe you're confusing a will and goals, just a simple category error?
What does it even mean to "act perfectly with perfect intention"? Once again, you are using these words in a novel way that defies comprehension. I am not the one who is confused here.