Why does God have to be perfect?

[Rr6]

Steve posted one graphic to help understand were positive and negative curvature. I believe I posted one URL to a graphic that defines a torus-like pattern, with no inversions from the surface as Ive attempted to twice lay out clearly for the reader to read and consider as wholistic correlations that appear to me, to be one of the simplest and likely scenarios for wholistic theory of everything, that stems from this scenario that I'm still developing.

Here is the URL to a spiral trajectory that defines a torus like shapehttps://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http:// ... MwhRKCowKg

God as "U"niverse or as Universe/UniVerse is not perfect.

The closet we can come to saying God is perfect is via Fullers remarks, that,

..." The vector equilibrium is the true ... sness."...

Universe is tainted and Fuller would state, Universe is always off center i.e. dynamic Universe never pauses at equlibrium. It is eternally energetic ergo in motion and has opposing charges and opposing shapes.

Now I will address, for first time in this thread--- that I'm aware of ---the five regular/symmetrical polyhedra that Steve, mentions but never really supplied my exact quotes or which thread he was referencing text regarding five polyhedra.

They are not perfect, they are regular/symmetrical. The VE/cubo-octahedron is asymmetrical and combination of two regular/symmetrical polyhedra--- tetra{4}hedron and octa{8}hedron ---and combine to fill an all-space, 3D matrix that, defines 4 planes of close packed, 2D lattices. http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerge ... ate24.html

Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts can also be considered as being perfect since they do not occupy space, ergo cannot be tainted by charge, mass, spin, color, taste, etc......they alone are not God tho.

The one other perfection we can consider is macro-infinite, non-occupied space, as it also has no mass, no charge, color etc.......however, non-occupied space is shaped by our finite, occupied space Universe.

r6

-- Updated April 23rd, 2016, 1:53 pm to add the following --

Here is another reason why God is not perfect. Entropy.

In my previous posts, I laid out two numerically based 4 level/line patterns;

1) initial is topology of a sine-wave patterns with all prime numbers--- except 2 and 3 --- falling on 2nd line from top,

2) inside-outed version of the above that has numerical sine-wave pattern defined by two middle lines/levels and all prime numbers except 2 and 3 fall on top line-- ergo peak of positive curvature { gravity } ---if we associate the 4 levels with a torus.

Irrespective of my specific patterns, there exist a fact of prime numbers, and that is that decrease over time, and that to me, is reminiscent of entropy i.e. prime numbers begin heavily but gradually fall further and further apart the further our number accounting goes.

However, if we consider the fact that a torus is closed then we can presume the entropy--- as may be associated with less and less prime numbers ----comes to and terminal ending point in time.

r6

[JamesCaan]

Steve posted one graphic to help understand were positive and negative curvature. I believe I posted one URL to a graphic that defines a torus-like pattern, with no inversions from the surface as Ive attempted to twice lay out clearly for the reader to read and consider as wholistic correlations that appear to me, to be one of the simplest and likely scenarios for wholistic theory of everything, that stems from this scenario that I'm still developing.

Here is the URL to a spiral trajectory that defines a torus like shapehttps://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http:// ... MwhRKCowKg

God as "U"niverse or as Universe/UniVerse is not perfect.

The closet we can come to saying God is perfect is via Fullers remarks, that,

..." The vector equilibrium is the true ... sness."...

False premise based solely on your lack of understanding in this subject. Fillers remarks being referenced is an appeal to authority as he has never been proven an authority on God. I however can satisfy any inquiry that challenges me as an authority on God and prove that I am an actual authority. I welcome any inquiry which you may deem valid

Universe is tainted and Fuller would state, Universe is always off center i.e. dynamic Universe never pauses at equlibrium. It is eternally energetic ergo in motion and has opposing charges and opposing shapes.

Now I will address, for first time in this thread--- that I'm aware of ---the five regular/symmetrical polyhedra that Steve, mentions but never really supplied my exact quotes or which thread he was referencing text regarding five polyhedra.

They are not perfect, they are regular/symmetrical. The VE/cubo-octahedron is asymmetrical and combination of two regular/symmetrical polyhedra--- tetra{4}hedron and octa{8}hedron ---and combine to fill an all-space, 3D matrix that, defines 4 planes of close packed, 2D lattices. http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerge ... ate24.html

Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts can also be considered as being perfect since they do not occupy space, ergo cannot be tainted by charge, mass, spin, color, taste, etc......they alone are not God tho.

The one other perfection we can consider is macro-infinite, non-occupied space, as it also has no mass, no charge, color etc.......however, non-occupied space is shaped by our finite, occupied space Universe.

Another false premise. This is an equivocation fallacy as to what perfect means in regards to a being.

r6

-- Updated April 23rd, 2016, 1:53 pm to add the following --

Here is another reason why God is not perfect. Entropy.

Non sequitur. You must possess and prove that a perfect God cannot purposely display imperfection. Logic dictates that which is perfect can display imperfections purposely but that which is imperfect cannot display perfection. Nothing can be greater than itself but greatness can be mediocre if necessary. That is bullet proof reasoning.

In my previous posts, I laid out two numerically based 4 level/line patterns;

1) initial is topology of a sine-wave patterns with all prime numbers--- except 2 and 3 --- falling on 2nd line from top,

2) inside-outed version of the above that has numerical sine-wave pattern defined by two middle lines/levels and all prime numbers except 2 and 3 fall on top line-- ergo peak of positive curvature { gravity } ---if we associate the 4 levels with a torus.

Irrespective of my specific patterns, there exist a fact of prime numbers, and that is that decrease over time, and that to me, is reminiscent of entropy i.e. prime numbers begin heavily but gradually fall further and further apart the further our number accounting goes.

Numbers are meaningless and cannot be proven otherwise. Please provide evidence that numbers have value in reality. Do not mistake this demand as to a mind dependent request that numbers have value in the mind and this mind dependent value can be arbitrarily used for applications in reality as it is obvious that is true. When I say value in reality I literally mean locate a number in reality. Offer it up for scientific examination so that its properties can be determined to have value.

However, if we consider the fact that a torus is closed then we can presume the entropy--- as may be associated with less and less prime numbers ----comes to and terminal ending point in time.

False premise because there is no such thing as a "point" in time. This is illusory and a misapplication of point in regards to how it relates to time. Point implies a physical location. Time doesn't have a fixed demonstrable location.

r6

[YIOSTHEOY]

Why does God have to be perfect? Wouldn't it be easier to accept a God that wasn't perfect? A great but fumbling God seems more accurate to explain the all the messiness in the world don't you think? I mean if you're going to make something up it should at least make sense right?

I think after you have more closely studied Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, and Leibniz then you will better understand what they are talking about regarding the Philosophy God.

You may even begin to question their "definitions" of Him/Her/It.

As far as a religious God matters, if you like bumbling Gods you should study Greek mythology. It has lots of bumbling Gods in it.

However even so, Zeus is not that different from the Christian God The Father.

And Heracles is not that far from Jesus.

And Hermes is not that far from the Holy Spirit.

And Aphrodite is not that far from Holy Mary Mother of Christ.

[Rr6]

Here is another reason why God--- as occupied space UniVerse --- is not perfect. Entropy.

Irrespective of my specific given quasi-2D patterns and extrapolated as 3D, there exist a fact of prime numbers, and that is that, they decrease as more are accounted for, and that to me, is reminiscent of entropy i.e. prime numbers begin heavily but gradually fall further and further apart, the further our sequentially linear number accounting goes.

However, if we consider the fact that a torus is closed then we can presume the entropy--- as may be associated with less and less prime numbers ----comes to a terminal ending point in time.

Some will say, even within a torus that we can have infinite set numbers. This is the argument with and set of infinite numbers irrespective of what shape their associated with. Here is the kicker, and that is if were talkiing occupied space set of nodes that we can associate with the metaphyscial-1, mind/intellect/concept of prime numbers, then we come to quantum phenomena.

I.e. there is limit to how far we can subdivide a finite set of nodal events, irrespective of my given shape of torus.

The truth is out there for those who seek it those who don't and those who scoff at it.

r6

r6

[Jklint]

Because God in all its ethnic diversity - as created by us obviously - must collude into a summary significance beyond our conception. God begins to be perfect at the point where we can no-longer comprehend it.

[YIOSTHEOY]

Because God in all its ethnic diversity - as created by us obviously - must collude into a summary significance beyond our conception. God begins to be perfect at the point where we can no-longer comprehend it.

I am sure the various Gods are indeed flawless and completed, which is what the word perfect actually means.

But I suspect our own expectations of their gift giving falls short of our own desires.

The Philosophy God is a distant god not concerned with the everyday lives of humans.

The Christian God is a loving god but even He must get overwhelmed by demands and requests.

The other gods of the other religions are Legion and many, some distant while others do strange things supposedly.

Best thing is pray like everything depends on God but work like everything depends on you alone. Then you can't go wrong.

[Belinda]

YIOSTHEOY wrote:

Best thing is pray like everything depends on God but work like everything depends on you alone. Then you can't go wrong.

If this is good advice, and I think that it is, each person's god pertains to solely to that person. In this case, unless we have indoctrination on a wide scale, we lack an important source of social control.

The only course that makes sense then is that reason and compassion become God. Reason and compassion can be and often are inculcated during the process of education.

I was reared as a Scottish Presbyterian so I take the teachings of Jesus as interpreted by nice people from that culture as my personal example of what reason and compassion amounts to in practice, minus the supernatural bits, the end of the world bit, the total trust in divine providence, and the foreign missionaries bit. I understand that all world class religions have the same core attributes of reason and compassion.

God has to be perfection of reason and compassion otherwise it's not the sort of God we are talking about, but is the sort of god that can be got at by sacrifices and stuff. This is where YIOTHEOY's claim makes sense. There is no such thing as perfect reason and perfect compassion but this fact does not stop some of us wanting perfect reason and compassion and aiming to make the world match that perfection as much as possible. Therefore praying to an ideal of perfection helps motivation, and acting as if God is made by oneself is efficient.

[YIOSTHEOY]

YIOSTHEOY wrote:

Best thing is pray like everything depends on God but work like everything depends on you alone. Then you can't go wrong.

If this is good advice, and I think that it is, each person's god pertains to solely to that person. In this case, unless we have indoctrination on a wide scale, we lack an important source of social control.

The only course that makes sense then is that reason and compassion become God. Reason and compassion can be and often are inculcated during the process of education.

I was reared as a Scottish Presbyterian so I take the teachings of Jesus as interpreted by nice people from that culture as my personal example of what reason and compassion amounts to in practice, minus the supernatural bits, the end of the world bit, the total trust in divine providence, and the foreign missionaries bit. I understand that all world class religions have the same core attributes of reason and compassion.

God has to be perfection of reason and compassion otherwise it's not the sort of God we are talking about, but is the sort of god that can be got at by sacrifices and stuff. This is where YIOTHEOY's claim makes sense. There is no such thing as perfect reason and perfect compassion but this fact does not stop some of us wanting perfect reason and compassion and aiming to make the world match that perfection as much as possible. Therefore praying to an ideal of perfection helps motivation, and acting as if God is made by oneself is efficient.

I took a comparative religions class in college and the book we used said all major religions have 2 things in common:

1 - they teach a respect for all life

2 - they teach of the brotherhood of humankind.

Besides these 2 things, what I also learned is that there are about a dozen such major religions and a whole bunch more of individual American Protestant and Chinese folk religions.

So now I view organized religion as a potpourri from which any interested pilgrim may pick and choose.

The Protestant Reformation and revolution is most famous for removing the Pope and Cardinals from the equation and allowing you direct access to God.

I like that part (as Antonio Banderas would say, in Zorro).

[Starfleet]

Before Christianity became one of the dominating religions on earth, polytheism existed. Civilizations like the Greeks, Egyptians , and many others' deities made mistakes, acted foolishly, and behaved very much like the mortals that they were "superior" to. This may have been due to those civilizations wanting to relate as much as possible to their gods, without coming off as arrogant or saying that they were as good as them. When Christianity dominated the ancient world, and its leaders were wondering how to put together official teachings, they saw other civilizations' way of humanizing their deities, they didn't like that very much. They might've thought that having a deity like others before was too reflective of their own shortcomings, so to feel better about their lives while on earth and afterwards, they put together a god that was "perfect". This way, they would feel protected against anything that came their way, and felt that "justice" would be done upon those that got away with any evil doings while alive. In other words, by creating a "perfect" god, they created a psychological safety net.

[Starfleet]

We've become Gods in that we create all kinds of things. Soon we'll create a robot with artificial intelligence and it will be a product of intelligent design.

Creator God created/creates from self, God IS, therefore not a creature subject to death. Humans play with the created, (which incudes humans) moving it about fashioning things, like pottery from clay, Humans are subject to death. Humans get their intelligence from God so everything is a product of intelligent design.

God limited human intelligence, but gives us toys to play with to reach that limitation.

-- Updated Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:56 am to add the following --

Why does God have to be perfect? Wouldn't it be easier to accept a God that wasn't perfect? A great but fumbling God seems more accurate to explain the all the messiness in the world don't you think? I mean if you're going to make something up it should at least make sense right?

Perfection in Gods eyes is not the same as perfection in human eyes. Humans being limited in knowledge of all things, limits their knowledge of what true perfection is. God IS perfect, humans strive for what they think perfection is.

Maybe there is perfection in imperfection? I think the cycle of life is perfection in imperfection.

***Response: Do you logically find that "God" is perfect, or are you going off of what has been taught to you and reinforced all your life?. If it's the latter, then you're just repeating what you've been taught, not following any logical conclusion, which hurts the credibility of your argument.