Question

Hello Rabbi
 
In order to assume that it is rational to claim that God revealed Himself, you assume a number of things about God.
1. God changes –
2. God is perfect –
3. God lacks something –

In order to dissolve the tension between your first assumption and your second assumption, you argue that the change is a function of time (a perfect graph), or that the change is between two states of equal perfection. Therefore, change does not contradict perfection.
On the other hand, you do not resolve the tension between the third assumption and the second, and the contradiction remains – because if you claim that God is perfect, He should not be lacking anything.
If you argue that there is no lack here – there is only a perfect change on the timeline graph without any lack, then your argument about commandments as a higher need collapses (He does not need correction; He is perfect).
And if you argue that there is a lack here, then God is not perfect.
Beyond all this, as I said in the previous discussion (which was closed with mutual disagreement, both for these reasons and for other reasons, a link is attached below) – when you claim that God lacks something – and ignore the reason for the lack – you are basically shooting yourself in the foot with the causality on which you base your argument.
 
https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%9B%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%9A-%D7%92%D7%91%D7%95%D7%94