/lit/ - Literature

>>18981709
>A flaw or imperfection is a potentiality, and something purely actual would not have any imperfections and so would be perfect.
Begging the question. You cannot have a valid, well-defined concept of perfection without a perfect telos defined with reference to a perfect God, and you therefore cannot use such a concept to argue for the perfection of the purely actual something without presupposing that the purely actual something is already perfect.

Accept everything else for now, even though the argument for omnipotence contradicts itself and the argument for omniscience begs further questions. Once you take away perfection, what is left of God?