Skip to main content

Does Perfectionism Help?

Nothing better answers this question than the ancient adage:

[Imagine a rider fall off a horse that stumbles because it loses its shoe]

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

The moral is evident: Never undermine even a little, seemingly insignificant, nail.

However, we can put this proverb a bit differently to gain another valuable lesson:

[Imagine a farrier who refuses to shoe a horse because he can't find his perfect nail]

For want of a perfect nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a perfect horseshoe nail.

In this second version, the problem is not a want/lack of nails, but a non-acceptance of anything considered to be less than perfect. There are two problems with this form of want:

1. The Absolute Version: One may define "perfect" as the best of all or the most excellent of all, the ideal one. However, let's ask who determines which is the perfect nail? Again, is the shoe or the horse or the rider as perfect as this desire for the perfect nail?

2. The Relative Version: One may define "perfect" as that which best suits its object; in this case, the nail that best suits/fits the shoe. The farrier has the option of using other nails and achieve the same results; however, he refuses to compromise.

But, why should a helpful nail that is available at the right time be considered a substitute? A nail in need is a nail indeed.


PS:
Q. Is this being utilitarian in definitions?
A. Jesus, in His Parable of the Good Samaritan, defined a neighbor as not someone defined by society (i.e. caste-community-intrinsic definition) but someone who acts as a neighbor in time of need (function-intrinsic definition), even if he was unacceptable in the person's immediate society. Also, He called as His mother and brethren those who heard God's word and obeyed it (Luke 8:21)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is Water Baptism Necessary Before Partaking in Lord's Supper

"Last Supper" by Giovanni Domenico Tiepolo (1750) Yes, it is. Water baptism identifies one with the redemption work of Jesus Christ, with His death, burial, and resurrection. It is anticipated of visible identification with Christ and His Church. Every person has the personal responsibility to examine him/herself before deciding to partake in the Lord's Table. The Bible makes it clear that those who chose not to be baptized were rejecting the counsel of God (Lk.7:30). In a mixed congregation, it is not possible to always know who is worthy to partake of the Table; however, the minister must encourage only those who have been baptized for remission of sins (not just as a ritual but by faith in Jesus Christ) to partake of the Table. Before Jesus sat down to dip bread in the cup, He washed His disciples' feet. He makes the statement that they are already "washed" and only need feet to be washed. Of course, this may not explicitly/only refer to their baptism, fo

Matthew 6:31-33

"Therefore do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you." (Mat 6:31-33) The original sense of nakedness was from that deep insecurity of autonomy that sprung from man's first alienation from God due to sin-- spiritual death. Seeking God marks man's refusal to stay alienated by turning towards His Maker in whom alone is Covering and true Security and no reason to be ashamed anymore.

Is it not cruel for God to kill His Son in place of us?

The doctrine of atonement is a stumbling block for some who feel that it not only exemplifies cruelty but also does away with human responsibility. The issue abounds with various questions and attempts to solution. Questions: 1. If God knew that man would sin and fall, why did He create man? 2. Why doesn't God, if He exists, intervene and stop evil; why just be Judge but not be Governor with proper police security system that minimises the possibility of transgression? 3. How can the death of one particular man atone for the sins of many particular men? 4. Isn't it not cruel to punish an innocent man for the sins of others so that they go free? Answers that challenge the Christian doctrine: 1. God does not require sacrifice in order to forgive, He can forgive by sovereign authority. 2. Every man must bear his own guilt so that he has a sense of responsibility and possess a genuine reason to pursue good and turn from evil. Biblical Responses: 1. God's knowledge of human Fall