The Choice I Never Made...

Being that perfection is subjective, I don't see anything wrong with Pad disagreeing. Pad is simply arguing that perfection does not apply, and if it does then your standards for perfection are questionable. Being a subjective term does not give someone the license to ascribe any quality they want to perfection. It's not a neutral word; it implies no room for improvement. What I see is pad acknowledging perfection can mean different things, and then making a case for imperfection. Why shouldn't pad insert his take on god's perfection? I don't see it as ignoring the true point, but countering the point.

It is also not valid in a debate to use something someone said in another debate against them. If you see a pattern in his behavior, wait for it to emerge within this thread or address it in the other thread. When beardo says something like "all is as god wants so all is perfect' he not leaving much room for subjectivity. He is not saying this rug is perfect for the den, although the rug itself could use improvements. He is implying all is perfect because all is a result of god's will, we never choose god chooses for us. Pad is simply pointing out that god's perfect plan often includes failure, mistakes and flaws, all good reasons to question the use of the term perfection.

Statement: Hats are made perfect..

Rebuttal : Perfect for who? What about oblong heads, or dolicephalic heads, or brachycephalic heads?

Do you think hats are made perfect for these people?

Yes I see your point now, I stand corrected...


Although the word is subjective it can be argued subjectively therefore the better subjective answer is correct.

That makes much more sense...

I beleive what I observe. I never take another person's word for truth. I'm a man of many theories but no beleifs.

I believe that there is a God because for the same reason we do not kill ourselves, something greater then us decides to keep living/creating.
Proof: The universe is growing, so obviously new elements and compounds and being created.
Opinion:Something greater then us has the will to live, and create so it does.

Marlboro47 said:

I believe that there is a God because for the same reason we do not kill ourselves, something greater then us decides to keep living/creating.
Proof: The universe is growing, so obviously new elements and compounds and being created.
Opinion:Something greater then us has the will to live, and create so it does.

Click to expand...

see your all wrong on that point the universe isnt "growing" its "expanding"

nothing that is matter or energy exists that didnt exist in one form at the time of the big bang

what wasnt there is the gaps inbetween (also known as Space)

everything is getting further away for everything else rather than new things being created

that is when they are not bound by gravity
i.e.
solar system/ milky way / local galaxy group

ginjawarrior said:

see your all wrong on that point the universe isnt "growing" its "expanding"

nothing that is matter or energy exists that didnt exist in one form at the time of the big bang

what wasnt there is the gaps inbetween (also known as Space)

everything is getting further away for everything else rather than new things being created

that is when they are not bound by gravity
i.e.
solar system/ milky way / local galaxy group

Click to expand...

Yep, expanding, not growing. However, new elements are being created, but they don't appear in nature. This begs the question; if creation of elements equals God, what does that make these scientists?

Heisenberg said:

Yep, expanding, not growing. However, new elements are being created, but they don't appear in nature. This begs the question; if creation of elements equals God, what does that make these scientists?

Click to expand...

ahh but they arent being created from nothing they are just transformed from one form to another

their very first original form was present from the start of big bang