Board index ‹ God

[Michael Keaton]

Any reason that is given will still boil down to my fundamental disagreement. If he “wanted” anything at all, that means he was not content without it in the first place. Otherwise creating the thing he desired would not have been necessary. Even if you disagree with the word imperfect here, desiring or wanting something ultimately implies that he wasn’t satisfied without it.

[jimwalton]

I've heard this argument before, and it doesn't hold up in the wash. Where there is life, there is desire. It's impossible to have life and not have desire. It doesn't indicate a lack but rather a condition of consciousness. It doesn't indicate lack of contentment, incompleteness, or imperfection. Instead, desire is a necessary part of being alive. Desires can be channeled toward the good or bad; they can derive from a lack or flow from abundance.

[Michael Keaton]

This is interesting and well out, I may need to chew on it a little more, but my firsts thoughts are:

1. It’s interesting to relate god to life because I would assume his “life” is obviously different than biological life.

2. I think I disagree that desires don’t indicate a lack of something. Even if desire itself is intrinsic to life there still is a cause to the desire. For example I don’t desire food when I’m stuffed to the brim. I only desire it when I’m hungry.

[jimwalton]

Suppose I desire the best life for you. Does that indicate I am imperfect or have a lack?

[Michael Keaton]

I’m not sure the analogy follows because you didn’t create me. If you were to relate it to a parent creating a child and then desiring the best outcome that would make more sense. In which I would argue parents have children to fulfill their own lives. They had no children, but wanted children, in which they create a child to fulfill the desire.

[jimwalton]

I understand what you're saying, but your real point, at least it seemed to me, was that any desire is a sign of imperfection. It seemed to me that you were saying that a true state of perfection is static and therefore does not and cannot have any desires, for any desire shows or allows for change, or even desires change, and is "therefore imperfect." Where have I understood you incorrectly?

[Michael Keaton]

No i think you understood fairly well. I think the biggest flaw with my argument is peoples different perspectives of what perfect means. The movement or change doesn’t necessarily mean the god is Imperfect. However, it does imply that it desired to create something that wasn’t already created.

[jimwalton]

Thanks. There's no debate that the Bible says that God created something that wasn't already created. You seemed to be implying that automatically showed that God is imperfect, which doesn't follow. I trust you can see that your argument isn't as disproving as you originally thought. Thanks for a good conversation.

[Michael Keaton]

For sure glad to have a conversation. I think I can rearrange the words better, I still think it implies a being that is changing/growing/learning. Maybe not imperfect but also not at peak perfection.