Is God Flawed???

[Cironian]

Nay. Perfection is unattainable, hence God can't be perfect. The concept of perfection is flawed, meaning also that God isn't perfect, and is flawed so. True, though, perfection is flawed, but that wasn't exactly th point I was aiming for.

[Divine Virus]

I have seen this topic discussed in other forums and am interested in anybody's opinion on this. I guess the question really is if there is/are a god/gods/entity (or whatever) can they be perfectly good or is there some inherent 'badness' to them. I don't really have a good way of what I'm trying to ask but Ill try.

There are two possibilities, both which undermine the idea of God as flawless. For if he/she/it created evil (again, he created free will, but evil had to exist as a choice before that choice could even be made), then that undermines the notion of a perfectly good being. The other possibility is that he did not create evil, but if he didn't then evil exists as a abstract ideal that supercedes even God.

This line of thinking has been going back and forth for 1800 years

So here is an old early Christian line of thought on the matter (I am not Christian, but it applies to any conception of God insofar as he is a) omnipotent, b) omniscient, c) omnibenelovent, and d) atemporal). I am just going from memory, and thus it will be a bit rough, some movements of the argument rough, or missing. If you feel like criticizing I will find my notes and fill in any blanks.

God is all good. He is literally the definition and standard of good. He is the Good, in the platonic sense. As such, all things are only good insofar as they participate in God. God's will is providence, and providence is the principle of all things and therefore all things are good insofar as they participate in their principle. By looking to their principle, all things participate in God, and thus all things are good. Unless they choose not participate in their function, and forget their principle. Since God is all good, and is the principle and pattern for all things, evil is no thing. Evil is nothing. To move away from one's principle is to become participate less in God, and thus less real. By being less real, you are being Evil. The move away from God is Evil, naught else is.

Personally, I don't believe in the existence of good and evil except as soft concepts within the human mind. Therefore the problem of God creating evil isn't a problem for me because evil doesn't exist .

As to the notion that everything has to be flawed

So is God flawed? Is this like saying that everything is flawed, and that nothing is perfect? Yes to both questions. I hate to delve again into my perfection rant, but perfecton, by definition, is he absence of flaw.

I do not agree with this definition, however I cannot venture a more complete one so I will accept it for the purpose of this discussion.

Given that flaw is a matter of opinion, like beauty is, there will always be conflict to whether something is flawed.

Please note that this implies that there is no objective truth in the universe, only subjective opinion.

Unless complete unanimity is decided, perfection cannot exsist. Perfection, also by definition, is unattainable. we cannot have perfection for the same reason that someone will always disagree, even if just for the sake of disagreeing. and no, we can't have a split decision on perfection, becausethis like saying there can be a difference in fact. (There really shouldn't be any such thing as fact either, but I must restrain myself from delveing into ANOTHER notion of mine right now, or I will never post this in this lifetime.)

This only means that there cannot be a universal agreement on what is perfect. Individuals can still perceive something to be perfect, to be without flaw. Likewise, by the previous quote, it is only in YOUR mind that unanimity is required for perfection, because it is you perceive the lack of unanimity to be a flaw, and flaws are entirely subjective. Unfortunately, this also creates a snag in the argument. I would say that the flaw of lack of unanimity just exists in your mind, and thus isn't real, and thus does not enforce necessity upon God, or the Universe. You would say that all subjective opinion enforces necessity upon God and the Universe in matters of perfection. Neither point of view can be proven to be true or false based on the condition of this discussion. Perhaps a prolonged discussion could, but that is neither here nor now.

Given that perfection is unattainable, this means that everything is flawed, and that God is indeed flawed.

Alternatively, it could mean that everything is perfect, because nothing is flawed, because flaws are not real outside of the human mind. As such, God would only be flawed within the scope of human perception, or rather the human mind is not capable of grasping the perfection of God. Which certainly doesn't mean that God isn't perfect.

However, this is not such a bad thing. If, on the hypothetical, perfection were attainable, everything would have to be perfect, and God would have to be perfect (seeing as how God is everything, and everything is connected). If everything were perfect, opinion could not exsist, and therefore thought could not exsist.

I am not sure how you reached the conclusion that if everything was perfect, opinion and thought couldn't exist. Trying to retrace to movements of your argument, I suppose you mean that "if everything is perfect, then nothing is flawed. There is only one way for nothing to be flawed, one way to be perfect. Therefore all things are locked into a state of perfection, and no movement is possible, because any movement would bring one away from perfection. And because everything is perfect, everyone knows everything is perfect, and thus there could be no debate, no subjective matters, and without subjectivity, no opinion is possible, and thus no thought is possible." I hope I followed that right. The assumptions contained therein is that perfection has only one path, there is only one way for everything to be perfect. That it is not possible for multiple situation to all be without flaw, and thus all be perfect. It has a lot of other assumptions, but the battery is dying in my laptop, so I must sign off.

[Cironian]

(I wish in no way to offend anyone with the content of this post. I do not believe in a God, but will refer to higher entity and power as God within this post for the sake of convenience.)

So is God flawed? Is this like saying that everything is flawed, and that nothing is perfect? Yes to both questions. I hate to delve again into my perfection rant, but perfecton, by definition, is he absence of flaw.

I do not agree with this definition, however I cannot venture a more complete one so I will accept it for the purpose of this discussion.

Allow me to make clear this issue:

"Perfection: Completion; making perfect; full developement; faultlessness (to perfection, exactly, ..." p. 820, The Oxford Concise Dictionary, circa 1976

Last time I checked, fault meant flaw. I hope this makes my definition a tad less obscure. Anyways...

Given that flaw is a matter of opinion, like beauty is, there will always be conflict to whether something is flawed.

Please note that this implies that there is no objective truth in the universe, only subjective opinion.

What is your point here? Alright, assuming that there is only subjective opinion in the universe, then there is no such thing as fact. Because we can't truly be sure of what is and what isn't, as the universe is a place of endless possibility. So really, what does it matter that this statement implies such; is it not entirely likely?

Given that perfection is unattainable, this means that everything is flawed, and that God is indeed flawed.

Alternatively, it could mean that everything is perfect, because nothing is flawed, because flaws are not real outside of the human mind. As such, God would only be flawed within the scope of human perception, or rather the human mind is not capable of grasping the perfection of God. Which certainly doesn't mean that God isn't perfect.

But might not God only exist at all within the scope of human perception, perception that made God in the minds of man, in order to explain miracles, phenomena, our existence, etc? And if the human mind is incapable of perceiving the perfection of God, who is to say that that perfection is there at all?

Unless complete unanimity is decided, perfection cannot exsist. Perfection, also by definition, is unattainable. we cannot have perfection for the same reason that someone will always disagree, even if just for the sake of disagreeing. and no, we can't have a split decision on perfection, becausethis like saying there can be a difference in fact. (There really shouldn't be any such thing as fact either, but I must restrain myself from delveing into ANOTHER notion of mine right now, or I will never post this in this lifetime.)

This only means that there cannot be a universal agreement on what is perfect...

Contraire! What I said was that in order for something to be truly perfect, there can be no argument that it is perfect. A killer might think he/she lives a perfect life, but is their life not flawed when they kill someone, ending the victim's life and devasting the lives of others? Perfection is a viewpoint, but it also must be fact for it to be true perfection (or at least in the matter of God, as God is omni-present). given the implication of something I said previously, nothing can truly be fact, as we only see through our filter of perception. we percieve the universe in a unique way, and thus, everyyone has a unique opinion. If anyone were to argue that something was not perfect, it would not be perfect, as it does not appease to everyone's perception.

I suppose this concludes my all too long post response. I wish merely to leave with the statement that flaw is not a bad thing. Flaw is the root of subjectivity, of our perception, our existence. Perfection means to be without flaw, but nothing is truly perfect, is it? God is all, and all is not perfect. Were all perfect, human perception would not have created the fundamentals of God, or the concept of Flaw.

[Divine Virus]

Just a quick note to say I am not offended. Not in the least. I am very busy preparing for a trip right now, and thus haven't had time to answer. I just didn't want you to construe my silence as me being offended.
Cheers!

[luciferi]

Epicurus the philosopher said this: "Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to; or he cannot and does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, and does not want to, he is wicked. But, if God both can and wants to abolish evil, then how comes evil in the world?" So as you can see many people both great and small from all ages of the earth have pondered upon this question. As others have somewhat said if there is a god then you must consent that he is at least a little bit more powerful than you. Therefore how can it be possible for us to try and understand/judge him when we cannot know the end of all things. However this does seem like a bit of a copout. I have still yet to see who god is but unlike most agnostics (which I am one) I do believe there is evidence of some sort of god, but I am but a human so how can I understand the cruelties that plague this planet on both the evil and pure.

[Cironian]

Epicurus the philosopher said this: "Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to; or he cannot and does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, and does not want to, he is wicked. But, if God both can and wants to abolish evil, then how comes evil in the world?" So as you can see many people both great and small from all ages of the earth have pondered upon this question. As others have somewhat said if there is a god then you must consent that he is at least a little bit more powerful than you. Therefore how can it be possible for us to try and understand/judge him when we cannot know the end of all things. However this does seem like a bit of a copout. I have still yet to see who god is but unlike most agnostics (which I am one) I do believe there is evidence of some sort of god, but I am but a human so how can I understand the cruelties that plague this planet on both the evil and pure.

If you're intereted, take a look at one of the other topics in the Philosophy Corner, The problem of evil. Several have stated their viewpoints as to this over there.

[avatar_of_existence]

Look, I think if you're stretched enough to believe in God, it's not too much further a stretch to believe he's perfect. This is all based on the idea that he exists right? And is perfection flawed? Perhaps it's the flaws that are perfect. The difference is in allowing for the truly perfect, and why not? You don't have to believe in something to allow for the possibility. Basically, if you believe in God you likely believe he is the perfect of the perfect, and his flaws (of his creation) are perfect as well.

[Jerako]

I rather like the ancient Gnostic Christian viewpoint on this issue, although they seemed to have been an odd bunch. As I understand it (and my understanding might not be perfect, so bear with me, they're rather difficult texts), there's some sort of supergod entity, that exists similar to how I understand Jung's "collective unconscious" idea to work. It created pieces of itself (Aeons, in the texts), that existed within it, but weren't aware of each other, nor of the God. It allowed them to grow a bit before it revealed their true collective nature to them. Some of them developed some personality quirks along the way, and one of those with quirks created more things within it(her?)self, our world being one of them. Because this Aeon was flawed, everything it created, the world including, was flawed. This entity, unaware of its greater Self (the real God), and believed itself to be God. The Gnostics seemed to believe this entity was the God of the Old Testament, and quite despised it. They believed that the Christ came with knowledge of this collective entity/god (Which was the very "secret knowledge" or "Gnosis" from which they derive their name).

In simpler terms, the idea I like in all this is that yes, the world is flawed, and individual sections of "God" may in fact be flawed, but as a collective whole, and thus from a perspective we couldn't possibly understand, is quite perfect.

Existence/God is greater than the sum of its parts, may be another way to say this, I think.


They also have another idea which I like: at one point, the disciples asked the Teacher (Christ) whether we are governed by some form of Destiny/Fate/Whatever you want to call it, or, if we all had free will and everything just sort of happened as a result of our choices.

The Teacher responded, "Neither, for both of these ideas are inherently flawed, being the products of Man's limited mind."
- This I believe, is the problem with all of our speculation. Logic, although providing extremely seductive answers, is a product of our minds. We cannot understand everything perfectly, nor should we. In the end, the only "flaw" in existence may be in us.

[Callan S.]

It's judgement that ascribes things as flawed.

The source of flaws is judgement.