This argument won't be going anywhere but a tangent pretty soon. It'll just bring up this whole irony thing again. Adam and Eve messed up so they brought evil into the world, like it says in the Bible, thereby reaffirming faith. Or the world is evil, because of man's nature. Man's nature is the result of evolution. Either way the world is the way it is and both sides to either argument are going to see the evidence through their own eyes. Anyways on to perfection itself, I had written on the matter earlier, but I guess it never went through. Personally, perfection is objective and can not be left up to the eye of the beholder. Perfect scores exist, like in bowling for instance, but whether that means perfect is the same as best is more to the point. If so, then what is best is also perfect. What's best for life? etc. Since we all think of ourselves as imperfect (that seems to be the case) how could we ever hope to know what perfection is? I think we would have to be perfect to know what perfect is. Furthermore, how could we know what a perfect system is? @El Diablo, we can take your point a little further. What if it didn't work at all? Isn't something that works a personal value. I can't stand it when things work. (cwatididthar). Instead of diminshing values, I think we have to objectively comprise them together. There are multiple means to an end that work, but there always exists the greatest possible way. Actually, now that I think about, perfection is the highest echelon of wisdom. Wisdom is choosing the highest goal, fulfilling it the best way, and doing if for the right reasons. But, I digress...
because it doesn't explain things like natural disasters and whatnot that humans have no power over. as well as it doesn't even describe why there is evil in people. The only hardships or bad things described are: snakes will crawl on the ground people will fear and kill snakes and snakes will kill people farming is hard to do humans have to die eventually other than those things nothing that is considered evil is addressed. Even if you were to back up and tell the whole story it wouldn't explain anything. The idea that people are inherently evil because the first one at a knowledge fruit is simple lunacy and scoffs at basic genetic principles. Unless the fruit changed the makeup of their DNA they could not have passed on any traits they gained from it since acquired traits aren't passed on. An example you could understand this concept with is a man who has lost his leg still has children born with two legs because it is in his DNA to have two legs. Now if you would like to tell me how a fruit could go about changing the DNA of someone be my guest, although I highly doubt you know how this process would work, let alone how simply eating fruit would do it. I defined it as a system that's goal is to achieve perfection. You could think of what I'm saying as-- The reason its not perfect is because perfection is still in the process of being created. No, work can be very clearly defined as actions, in this case work as part of a system means that there are actions that lead to an ultimate resolution. I see what you did but that doesn't work. You can say "I hate it when my computer works." but it doesn't suddenly stops working. That's just an opinion, a statement of emotion really. Just because you or any person doesn't like something, doesn't mean it is automatically a bad thing. Would you like to be ruled by one emperor or king with absolute power? Probably not, but it was efficient for centuries with the Romans, Egyptians, etc. Really, "bad thing" doesn't have anything to do with it anyways since we are talking about perfection. You could say, "I hate perfection," but that doesn't mean its not perfect. That would be perfect wisdom, just a type of perfection. Since perfection is the highest quality of something you can have perfect anything. You could have the perfect t-shirt or the perfect cupcake, anything. You are just describing one way to be perfect, not the end all definition.
There's obviously a lot of misconceptions about perfection in this thread. Points which I could address, however, this is not directly relevant to "The Beginning." Please stay on topic.
This alone can mean hundreds of things. You might find this statement stubborn, irritating, unintelligent, etc.. but.. You simply can't put limits on God. It's the simple Christian truth, and I can't debate if you plan on taking science as your sole supporter.
If God has no limits, then why did he stop at an imperfect system? Is it his plan? He has some sort of plan that will make this imperfect system perfect? If that was the case, why did he not make the system perfect to begin with? The point is, perfection can be subjectified to the point where it's not debatable anymore.
"It takes a crane to build a crane It takes two floors to make a storie It takes an egg to make a hen It takes a hen to make an egg There is no end to what I'm saying It takes a thought to make a word And it takes some words to make an action And it takes some work to make it work It takes some good to make it hurt It takes some bad for satisfaction Ah la la la la la la life is wonderful Ah la la la la la la life goes full circle Ah la la la la life is wonderful Ah la la la la la It takes a night to make it done And it takes a day to make you young brother And it takes some old to make you young It takes some cold to know the sun It takes the one to have the other And it takes no time to fall in love But it takes you years to know what love is And it takes some fears to make you trust It takes those tears to make it rust It takes the dust to have it polished Ah la la la la la la life is wonderful Ah la la la la la la life goes full circle Ah la la la la la la life is wonderful Ah la la la la It takes some silence to make sound And it takes a lost before you found it And it takes a road to go nowhere It takes a toll to show you care It takes a hole to see a mountain" Life is Wonderful by Jason Mraz. You can argue this fine, but I think everything good always has an equal bad side in the world...kind of the ying-yang thing. That's a really big beauty in the world, IMO, and probably is the only possibility of perfection past neverending numbness (I'd so much rather be here, LOL). By the way, with the snake: it was a giant snake and had legs. Biblical snake, much? That's just my little thing I like to say though....the whole thing is metaphor till Abraham anyway.
I didn't. I put limits on a piece of fruit which is very reasonable. but that doesn't because now I'll just be taking science as my sole supporter till you get pissy and leave. Again. Why is it an imperfect system?
So a perfect system is a system that's trying to be perfect? I think you misunderstood my point, which was that perfection isn't reducing a system till it simply works. There are various makes and models of cars and they work, they can't all be perfect, that would go against the very idea of perfection itself. So you see, simply working isn't enough, it has to be the best. You can, however, objectively define perfection by work done, but instead of simplifying you have to add on until you can't add anymore. As far as the apple thing goes. The capability to sin was already there, it doesn't really have anything to do with genetics. This will spark the whole God made a flawed product, but that's arguing semantics. Suffice to say, I'm satisfied with this, that as God is all-powerful he has the capacity to do anything, but at the same time won't ever do anything against his nature. If he could create the universe then he could sin, but again won't. Now that'll just bring up that God is controlled by his nature, therefore not all powerful, therefore not sovereign, etc.. But that's going off on a tangent, the point is that the human mind is capable of many things, limiting what it can do to simple genetics is fallacious. How else could human society, technology, communication, etc. have progressed? It's degrading, the universe will end someday. People will cease to exist. A perfect system is pristine, it doesn't need upgrades, because it is ultimately the best and will always be the best. It will not degrade or die out. It is perfect. Let me put it to you another way. One of God's attributes is perfection and that same attribute governs all other attributes just as they govern each other. God is also eternal. If you were to remove any one of God's attributes then He could no longer be perfect.
I agree with rusty that a perfect universe would not end. A perfect universe would be eternal, not static, but eternal. Look at the possible ends, even though we're supposed to be talking about the beginning. Right now the only foreseeable way that the universe could be eternal is the Big Crunch Theory. Which would give us a universe that is eternally exploding and contracting. Unfortunately, all of the data shows that instead of slowing down and eventually contracting it is speeding up in it's expansion. This is not a perfect universe using the definition of perfection needing to be partnered with infinity.
Why is it every time I enter this debate someone needs to get personal and start saying crap about me? That's why I leave. And about your fruit thing. For all we know, God could have been the fruit itself.
Because every time you enter the debate you start complaining that everyone's making things personal against you? And if you say it like that, then doesn't that make it highly subjective? In example, for all we know the fruit could have been Kanye West. (Off topic: Yo Eve, I'm really happy for you, and Imma let you finish, but eat this fruit and you'll be like God)
Well look at this.. -.- Okay, so I guess I'm just trying to say that the fruit could be anything because we don't have too many specifics about it.. Plus, it could just be a metaphor.. I just don't like it when someone says it's exactly something, when really it could be everything and anything at the same time. What's irritating me: It gets to the point where I've got this big idea, but then someone scrutinizes at one irrelevant detail, then by the time the small detail is resolved, I've completely lost where I'm planning on going with it.. Then it circles around again. JUST like how people are talking about perfect systems.. I don't see how it's relevant anymore.
You shouldn't take it as a metaphor if you're going to cite it as the existence of God. It needs to be precise, otherwise how can you accept the rest of it. And if you say that bit's and pieces are true, then by whose standards? It's either a piece of fruit or the Bible's wrong. Happens to me a lot. You should write down what you think, journal them even. You'll start connecting dots in your head and be more sure of yourself as a person. It is somewhat relevant that if we can agree, on something for once, that this system isn't prefect, then it adds some credulity about the entrance of sin to cause the universe to be imperfect.
It could be a fruit.. but what if God is part of the fruit? It could be just a fruit AND something else. What if it's a metaphor? Would the Bible be wrong if the fruit were an idea? What that technically make it "wrong" or incorrect? The thing is that we only know what is what it is by how we see it. There's no room for what we don't see, only if we are told by someone else how to see it. Nobody can judge based on what they think they see. After all, we are incapable of seeing all. To finish off: How do you explain if something is incorrect if you only know what's incorrect by your own standards? Meh, don't have the time. I agree, and have always agreed, that this "system" is imperfect. Far from it, actually.
The reason I bring up the 'imperfect system' argument is because if God is perfect, why would he create an imperfect system?
I'm going to put my pet cat in a room, a cat that I love and feed and care for and tend to. I'm going to put my favourite slippers in that room, which I really don't want that cat to mess up. I then tell the cat not to destroy my slippers. If the cat destroys my slippers I shall condemn it, maybe break its legs so it is less able than before and will feel pain, then I'll throw it out in the streets to fend for itself, seems fair enough to me. Guess what the cat went and dun well did? Needless to say the cat deserved what was coming to it, it was totally not my fault. Stupid cat. I can totally see where God is coming from, can't you? Now I'm going to go buy a new cat and a pair of slippers.
I'm speaking from my experience of taking a systematic theology class. The Hebrew is very literal about it being a fruit and besides omnipresence of God, there is nothing to suggest that the fruit is the embodiment of God. Also, the fruit itself didn't change Adam and Eve, it was the act of disobedience. You can't make it a metaphor, because that's not the tone of the passage either. I should just get my systematic notes because you don't seem to understand the basics. No offense. The second paragraph sounds like a whole bunch of hooey. We all know what the color green is or what a desk is, etc. Beyond out physical universe, we can't know what to make of it all. But, apparently within the Bible there is some source of truth that would say otherwise. I'll answer your question with another question. Could God be God if he didn't know he was God. So, how could we be in a perfect system? We would have to know that and sense we don't really know anything, I take that as another clue that our system is imperfect. God didn't. Man screwed it up, etc.
haha awesome. that has to be the best statement ive seen after reading all 8 of these pages. first im going to be my input on the whole beginning thing. i have no clue whatsoever how we came to be, i do somewhat believe in evolution as it has some fact to it, but to the matter of how matter came to be and the start of anything? how could you possibly know? unless there is some being that was there at the very beginning to tell us what happened. but that doesnt even make sense because how could a being have been there before anything was there? to me this completely disproves any god theory, because like ppl have said how was god created? he couldnt have possibly made him self. and if something made god then god wouldnt be god (atleast how people think of god to be god) how can people believe in god or that god created everything, when there is no facts to it. i would like a single argument from the god side that has any fact to the statement that god created everything? because i have never seen a single one. yes we did by inventing currency