Be Ye Perfect: Absolute or Progressive?

Perfect, You Say?

For years mankind has wrestled with the concept of perfection, the idea that mankind is imperfect, and the question of whether he can or cannot attain perfection. Sayings such as “Nobody is perfect” express the defeat and despondency of man in this wrestle. Eric Hoffer once pointed out that “Nature attains perfection, but man never does.” Joseph Campbell also stated, “Perfection is inhuman. Human beings are not perfect.” But it was Mahatma Gandhi who boldly said, “Man will ever remain imperfect, and it will always be his part to try to be perfect.” Long before these modern leading figures, the Greek philosophers contended with this subject too. One of the arguments related to this subject that got my attention is from Aristotle. Speaking of the development of moral virtues and perfection, he declared that “none of the moral virtues arises in us by nature; for nothing that exists by nature can form a habit contrary to its nature… Neither by nature, then, nor contrary to nature do the virtues arise in us; rather we are adapted by nature to receive them, and are made perfect by habit.” Was Aristotle up to something here? Can we really become perfect through habitual practices of moral virtues? Is it even possible in our human capacity?

Interestingly, the Greek word teleios used by Aristotle here is the same word Matthew records Christ using when He said, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as the Father is…” (Matthew 5:48). Aristotle connects teleios with the development of moral virtue through habit, while Christ connects it with the character of the Father as manifested in love—even toward one’s enemies. The question then is: What does it mean to be perfect? The word teleios is a very semantically rich word. Our English word perfect is not a bad translation at all, and yes, the semantic range of teleios includes words such as complete, accomplished, finished, perfect, and even mature, depending on the context. What is fascinating about the word is that it expresses the concept of completeness or full development; the context determines what constitutes that completeness and whether it is being described as present, progressive, or ultimate. It is a state of completeness appropriate to a particular goal or stage.

Before we delve deeper into this wonderful subject of perfection, it would be wise to point out that, in the context of this exposition and the context of Jesus’s command that mankind must be perfect, it would be a weak argument to argue that teleios means perfect; therefore, Jesus meant absolute, sinless perfection, or that teleios means mature; therefore, Jesus isn’t talking about perfection. But here is an alternative proposition: teleios denotes a state of completeness, wholeness, full development, or an attainment of a relevant goal. English “perfect” or “mature” expresses that meaning according to context. Whether that completeness is absolute, relational, functional, developmental, or eschatological must be determined from the context rather than from the lexeme alone. So the question is: Can perfection be attained, and if so, will it be absolute perfection or progressive perfection? Was Aristotle right when he said that we are equipped to receive moral virtues and can attain perfection through habitual exercise? Was Christ’s command fair and realistic? Let us find out.

The Paradox of the Imperfections of a Perfect Man

There is little honest doubt concerning the profound corruption of mankind. The testimony is that “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood; destruction and misery are in their ways; and there is no fear of God before their eyes.” (Romans 3:10–18). John Calvin expounded on this matter as follows: “Let this, then, be admitted, that men are such as they are here described, not only by corrupt habits, but also by a depravity of nature;… I grant, indeed, that all these crimes are not exhibited in every individual; yet it cannot be denied that this monster lurks in the hearts of all. For as the body, which already contains within itself the cause and matter of a disease, although it has yet no sensation of pain, cannot be said to enjoy good health, neither can the soul be esteemed healthy, while it is full of such moral maladies; although this similitude will not correspond in every particular; for in the body, however diseased, there remains the vigour of life; but the soul, immersed in this gulf of iniquity, is not only the subject of vices, but totally destitute of every thing that is good.”

This is the innate problem: mankind is in a miserable condition, and to make things worse, the majority of us are in denial of this fact. We are not inherently worthless; in fact, we are infinitely invaluable, and the cross of Christ testifies of that. The problem is that, both circumstantially and by virtue of our nature, we do not experience the best of existence. We are deprived of a ceaseless delight of knowing and living in absolute truth. We do not reach the fullness of our capacity and do not know the bliss of a pure, holy, and complete life.

Our very mental and physical faculties never fully develop and operate in an optimal state. Fallen humanity never reaches the full developmental potential for which humanity was originally designed. The tragedy of sin is not merely that it makes us guilty; it prevents us from becoming what we were created capable of becoming. In addition to this miserable condition, we are incapable of redeeming ourselves or changing our fallen condition. Not only that, even if we were to develop good thinking patterns, the ability to properly regulate our appetites, passions, and affections, we would still have the problem of deleterious gene mutations, inherited tendencies, vulnerabilities, inclinations, or predispositions resulting from the Fall. Then there’s a problem of corrupted neuronal networks, traumatic memories, and more. These problems can only be eliminated through a complete eradication of our fallen biological and psychological conditions, which are one with our very being. There are dimensions of the Fall that cannot be corrected merely through education, cognitive restructuring, habit formation, or behavioural discipline. Even if human beings successfully developed their mental and behavioural faculties, there would remain a deeper problem that human methods cannot ultimately resolve.

So what then? Can we or can we not be perfect?

The question then is now no longer whether we can or cannot reach perfection through our own efforts. Aristotle cannot be right, then, in saying that we can reach perfection through habitual practice enabled by nature. That is an impossibility; mankind cannot even purge one sinful tendency on his own. Our nature is incapable of transformation on its own. Our mental and physical energies are insufficient to attain perfection. Our very mental and physical constitutions require a complete makeover to reach anything near that standard. We need a power outside of ourselves to subdue and redirect our nature. To take an opposite path from what we inherently want, we must have power from another.

Here is where I would like you to pause and consider the following: We often approach this subject in a black-and-white manner: either we can attain absolute perfection or we cannot. In our minds, the latter implies that we will remain under the curse of being enslaved by the corruption of our nature. May I suggest a few propositions to consider: Genuine perfection without absolute perfection—perfection can be real and yet still not reach the same level as God’s infinite perfection. Present perfection without final perfection—perfection can be genuinely complete now, proportionate to one’s knowledge, nature, and circumstance, while awaiting more knowledge and further development. Progressive perfection without completed development—perfection does not necessarily mean cessation of growth, but rather mastery in one’s sphere. Lastly, creaturely perfection without divine perfection—the perfection of a creature cannot and never will be identical with the perfection of the Creator. A person can be perfect according to the sphere, light, capacity, and responsibility presently possessed, while still having infinite capacity for further development. Therefore, the human being must be transformed by divine power, but that transformation begins within the present creature and continues beyond the present condition.

Oh! Yes, we can bring into subjection, under the power of God as it is revealed and given in His Word and through the person of Christ, every bodily impulse and every mental corruption. Our distorted neuronal pathways, our inordinate desires and unbridled passions, our dysregulated appetites and affections—all can be mastered through the power of God alone. Mastery over our nature can only be achieved through the impartation of power from God, both to will and to do righteously (Philippians 2:13). Since corruption, sinfulness, dwells in our bones, every fiber in our beings is aggressively inclined towards wickedness; we are encumbered by evils from within and without. Our only hope to not indulge in it is to be kept by relying, wholly depending, with everything in us, upon the merits and virtues of Christ. Therefore, the perfection I’m describing here is not autonomous human perfection; it is Christ’s perfection bestowed as a covering over creaturely imperfection. Christ’s perfection becomes genuinely present in the believer while creaturely imperfection has not yet been completely eradicated. The bodily infirmities, the mental tendencies, and many other consequences of sin will remain until the corruptible puts on incorruption, the mortal puts on immortality, and the fallen nature is completely eradicated (1 Corinthians 15:53–54). Wherefore, presently the character can be genuinely transformed, while the fallen nature remains until glorification. Perhaps this apparent contradiction is not new. Martin Luther captured something of this paradox in the famous expression simul iustus et peccator — simultaneously righteous and a sinner.

This is the paradox of a righteous man: a sinner justified by grace, declared righteous, yet still possessing a fallen nature. Henceforth, his journey is lived through the imparted character of Christ, ever growing towards the full stature of Christ (Ephesians 4:13), but never reaching infinite height. At every step, perfect obedience is required, as the willingness and the ability to do so are provided. He is purified, ennobled, exalted above the earthly, and will finally be glorified. Perfection is a complete conformity to God in the sphere presently occupied by the creature, through dependence upon Christ, while the remaining consequences of the Fall await final eradication. Thus, “when it is in the heart to obey God, when efforts are put forth to this end, Jesus accepts this disposition and effort as man’s best service, and He makes up for the deficiency with His own divine merit.” As long as we possess this vile body, we can never claim to be sinless or without infirmities, nor can we claim to be immune to sin. Only in Christ can we be kept, and only when this vile body puts on a body like His glorious body (Philippians 3:21), robed in His righteousness and perfection, can we claim to be without any spot or wrinkle (Ephesians 5:27). This is the whole sum of “Be ye perfect, even as the Father is in Heaven” (Matthew 5:48). “We are not, therefore, to look to ascertain whether we are morally perfect, or ever to see any moral perfection anywhere else but in Christ. When we are perfect, is when we are crucified with Christ, and He lives in us. Galatians 2:20. And then the perfection is not ours, but His; but God, in His love to us, gives us all the credit, and treats us as though it were our own.” Through the grace and indwelling life of Christ, become whole and undivided in character and allegiance to God, reflecting within your creaturely sphere the same quality of self-giving, impartial love that exists perfectly and infinitely in your Heavenly Father. This is perfection.

Scripture quotations are from the King James Version (KJV).

Bibliography

Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Book II, Chapter 1. Translated by W. D. Ross.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Book II, Chapter 3, Section 2.

Campbell, Joseph. Pathways to Bliss: Mythology and Personal Transformation. Edited by David Kudler. Novato, CA: New World Library, 2004.

Gandhi, Mahatma. Selected Writings of Mahatma Gandhi.

Hoffer, Eric. Reflections on the Human Condition. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.

Luther, Martin. Lectures on Romans, 1515–1516. Weimarer Ausgabe, vol. 56.

Waggoner, E. J. “Attaining Moral Perfection.” The Present Truth, vol. 10, no. 42, October 18, 1894, pp. 662–663.

White, Ellen G. “Faith and Works.” The Signs of the Times, June 16, 1890. Reprinted in Faith and Works, pp. 47–50.