[unspun]

I like that phrase, "perfect is as perfect does," as you've said. It grants God his right to be a person (seems the least we can do, since he's pretty much done that for us).

Seems to me that the Infinite has to draw himself down a "bit," in order to relate to anything else. From the perspective of us finite beings, perhaps this is the fist thing we could call a "miracle."

And as it regards the matter of God vs. evil, this attitude about the facts admits to God being 'what' it all begins with (not evil). And that being the case, and he being Infinite God, yet a person who relates to the rest of us, I think it lets us see a more apt picture of the paradox -- bumps Mr. Mills' issue up a notch.

And God being a person relating to {not God}, rules must be established -- good rules, of course.

[general_re]

I like that phrase, "perfect is as perfect does," as you've said. It grants God his right to be a person (seems the least we can do, since he's pretty much done that for us).

The only major hole I can see with perfection being self-defining is, would we know it if we saw it, in that case? IOW, how do we distinguish "perfect" from "imperfect" if "perfect" can do anything it likes and still be "perfect"?

Ah, well - the concept of perfection is a pretty sticky one, if you stop and think about it for a while. For some reason, Mill didn't think to consider that one, though ;)