why were we created

ah but how do you know that a perfectly straight lines contains 180 degress on either sides of it? where is the evidence? you have never seen a perfect line so how can you presume so much????? this is the way you are arguing.

you do NOT understand completely what i am saying, otherwise you wudnt point on the things that you do and ask the questions that you do. you have been using illogical parallels, i have pointed them out and you fail to reply to them and reply with the same parallels again.

and i was only replying to your non sensical queries. i have already given a straight answer as to what a perfect being SHUD do. but apparently it is not to your liking and you go on to question why i say that when it really is quite obvious and ive elaborated on it. why is it then that you ask for a staight answer and also ask again for the already given explanations in the same question?? sum sud think you are merely trying to overwhelm me and derail a logical argument.

Let me continue.

A perfect being is unkown and observable and untestable. A perfect being as an absolute subject can not be deduced because you have no parallels to draw from.

Therefore anything involving what potentially happens with a perfect being can not be contradicting because nothing involving them can be known.

Now what you can say and I pray hope what you are really trying to say is this.

Everything leading up to a perfect being is contradicting because a can not be made. Because no one being can be perfect.

But in and of itself if you assume perfection is there than you must also accept you do not know what perfection can be to be a contradiction.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
ah but how do you know that a perfectly straight lines contains 180 degress on either sides of it? where is the evidence? you have never seen a perfect line so how can you presume so much????? this is the way you are arguing.

you do NOT understand completely what i am saying, otherwise you wudnt point on the things that you do and ask the questions that you do. you have been using illogical parallels, i have pointed them out and you fail to reply to them and reply with the same parallels again.

and i was only replying to your non sensical queries. i have already given a straight answer as to what a perfect being SHUD do. but apparently it is not to your liking and you go on to question why i say that when it really is quite obvious and ive elaborated on it. why is it then that you ask for a staight answer and also ask again for the already given explanations in the same question?? sum sud think you are merely trying to overwhelm me and derail a logical argument.

Where do you begin to measure a perfect being.

Your evidence is none existence and draws from things that has nothing to do with what you are trying to imply.

And I understand what you are trying to say its just that you aren't saying right. 😉

^angles are measured based on imperfect equipment and imperfectly straight lines, as such they can not be perfect. hence, you can not say at all{from your point of view} that we know that a perfect line wud have 180 degrees on both side because all evidence on angles has been collected from imperfect lines and imperfect measuring equipment. as such, human beings can never conceptualise or comment on a PERFECTLY STRAIGHT line since such a thing doesnt exist and its properties are not known.

just like{from my perspective} i can get closer and closer to a perfectly straight line and extrapolate to IMAGINE a perfectly straight line, hence, i can do the same with the idea of perfection. i see different things with different nearness to perfection around me all the time, based on their individual properties, i can extrapolate to form ideas about completely perfect things in those categories, and extrapolate from that to find out the characteristic of sumthing which is completeley perfect in every way. such an entity wud be complete in itself because NOTHING can be better than perfect and wud neither need to do, nor create destroy or edit ANYTHING about or through itself as there is no other form of its or its affect that is more perfect.

Here let me put into what you are trying to say.

You are once again trying to say that based on everything leading up to a perfect being is contradictory because that is as far as you can reasonably go.

That a perfect being can not exist because there is no way for a perfect being to come about because various things together make it impossible and even desire in and of itself makes being complete impossible. Therefore a perfect being can not exist.

Now listen to me. A perfect being is immeasurable and unobservable. Now you are correct and I have never argued with you up to a point. That no one can prove a perfect being exists.

The problem you are doing is that you are trying to speak as if you can reasonably now what a perfect being can do or would do. That means you are assuming that the said being exists for the point of your basis. That is a big no-no because at the point everything leading up to the perfect being not existing no longer applies because by your very assumption you have done away with it. Once that happens you no longer know what a perfect being will do or would possibly do because you have no measurable or observable way of knowing it.

So once again what you want to say.

Is that a perfect be can not exist because there is no way for them to exist because everything leading up to their existence begins to contradict itself.

And that is perfectly fine.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^angles are measured based on imperfect equipment and imperfectly straight lines, as such they can not be perfect. hence, you can not say at all{from your point of view} that we know that a perfect line wud have 180 degrees on both side because all evidence on angles has been collected from imperfect lines and imperfect measuring equipment. as such, human beings can never conceptualise or comment on a PERFECTLY STRAIGHT line since such a thing doesnt exist and its properties are not known.

just like{from my perspective} i can get closer and closer to a perfectly straight line and extrapolate to IMAGINE a perfectly straight line, hence, i can do the same with the idea of perfection. i see different things with different nearness to perfection around me all the time, based on their individual properties, i can extrapolate to form ideas about completely perfect things in those categories, and extrapolate from that to find out the characteristic of sumthing which is completeley perfect in every way. such an entity wud be complete in itself because NOTHING can be better than perfect and wud neither need to do, nor create destroy or edit ANYTHING about or through itself as there is no other form of its or its affect that is more perfect.

But you have the same problem as the person trying to measure the line. Because you yourself are imperfect you cannot realistically talk about what a perfect being would be like. All you can do is guess and invent meanings for perfection.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^angles are measured based on imperfect equipment and imperfectly straight lines, as such they can not be perfect. hence, you can not say at all{from your point of view} that we know that a perfect line wud have 180 degrees on both side because all evidence on angles has been collected from imperfect lines and imperfect measuring equipment. as such, human beings can never conceptualise or comment on a PERFECTLY STRAIGHT line since such a thing doesnt exist and its properties are not known.

just like{from my perspective} i can get closer and closer to a perfectly straight line and extrapolate to IMAGINE a perfectly straight line, hence, i can do the same with the idea of perfection. i see different things with different nearness to perfection around me all the time, based on their individual properties, i can extrapolate to form ideas about completely perfect things in those categories, and extrapolate from that to find out the characteristic of sumthing which is completeley perfect in every way. such an entity wud be complete in itself because NOTHING can be better than perfect and wud neither need to do, nor create destroy or edit ANYTHING about or through itself as there is no other form of its or its affect that is more perfect.

But fine if this how you want to keep wording everything and keep touting your evidence.

Then perfection can not exist and any and everything you base perfection of off is in fact not perfection and therefore everything you do is based on imperfect assumptions and therefore must be inherently imperfect as well. As is the case.

Originally posted by chickenlover98
if there is a god why would he create us

break a leg ushomefree 😎

According to the rules and regulations set forth by the men who thought him up, to antagonize us and toy with us.

Originally posted by Devil King
According to the rules and regulations set forth by the men who thought him up, to antagonize us and toy with us.

That's according the the OT 'Jew God', the NT "Santa God" is here to love and save us.

^ahan, but the consequence of that thought is that we can not develop ANY sort of precise mental concept as long as it doesnt precisely exist in the real world. so seeing that ultimate mathematical errors in measurement and observation are an inevitability, due to the rules of infinite{and our lack thereoff of infinite insight} , then you are implying that nothing in thw world can be known and no mental contructs can be form which even accurately portray one aspect of things in the real world itself{much less perfect versions of those things} . but how is it that such a world continues to exist???? how is it that we know that a line has 180 degrees on both sides on the infinite points that make it up? how is it that people can even have a concept of perfection and come very close to acheiving it and actually be able to tell how close they are to it and just where they missed it in confined samples like making real llife physical lines???? etc etc etc

it wud appear that your basic assumption is wrong then wudnt it, based on the world and what you urself had to admit in the above post?

also tell me sumthing,. why does the word "perfect" exist and is used in this conversation and you say that nuthing can be perfect{giving the impression that you actually KNOW what perfect is and hence can make the claim about all things in this world} and you and i can understand the meaning and significance of it , if indeed it is sumthing that can never be grasped and doesnt physically exist????

Originally posted by Robtard
That's according the the OT 'Jew God', the NT "Santa God" is here to love and save us.

😂

Originally posted by Robtard
the NT "Santa God" is here to love and save us.

From what? Himself?

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^ahan, but the consequence of that thought is that we can not develop ANY sort of precise mental concept as long as it doesnt precisely exist in the real world. so seeing that ultimate mathematical errors in measurement and observation are an inevitability, due to the rules of infinite{and our lack thereoff of infinite insight} , then you are implying that nothing in thw world can be known and no mental contructs can be form which even accurately portray one aspect of things in the real world itself{much less perfect versions of those things} . but how is it that such a world continues to exist???? how is it that we know that a line has 180 degrees on both sides on the infinite points that make it up? how is it that people can even have a concept of perfection and come very close to acheiving it and actually be able to tell how close they are to it and just where they missed it in confined samples like making real llife physical lines???? etc etc etc

it wud appear that your basic assumption is wrong then wudnt it, based on the world and what you urself had to admit in the above post?

also tell me sumthing,. why does the word "perfect" exist and is used in this conversation and you say that nuthing can be perfect{giving the impression that you actually KNOW what perfect is and hence can make the claim about all things in this world} and you and i can understand the meaning and significance of it , if indeed it is sumthing that can never be grasped and doesnt physically exist????

You can do what you wanted to do but you can not say it the way you were trying to say it.

You can say that there can be no perfect being in existence because everything leading up to it begins to contradict itself. And there is measurable observable traits that show this.

But once you get out of that observable, measurable territory like you did by trying to say what a perfect being would or would not do. Then you also have to except that it becomes a baseless assumption. As everything past that no longer has any weight.

Now you can say that you believe that perfection in and off itself becomes contradicting but at the same time you can not try and tout it as fact when someone says you really don't know what a perfect being would do.

Now what I would say is that Imperfection and perfection could in fact exist and become true perfection. And fro mthere a good civil discussion can take place about the metaphysical nature of a perfect being.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^ahan, but the consequence of that thought is that we can not develop ANY sort of precise mental concept as long as it doesnt precisely exist in the real world. so seeing that ultimate mathematical errors in measurement and observation are an inevitability, due to the rules of infinite{and our lack thereoff of infinite insight} , then you are implying that nothing in thw world can be known and no mental contructs can be form which even accurately portray one aspect of things in the real world itself{much less perfect versions of those things} . but how is it that such a world continues to exist???? how is it that we know that a line has 180 degrees on both sides on the infinite points that make it up? how is it that people can even have a concept of perfection and come very close to acheiving it and actually be able to tell how close they are to it and just where they missed it in confined samples like making real llife physical lines???? etc etc etc

I believe that life is primarily one's perception of events with all the imperfections inherent to that.

A line has 180 on both sides because the majority of people say so.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
it wud appear that your basic assumption is wrong then wudnt it, based on the world and what you urself had to admit in the above post?

Which assumption?

Originally posted by leonheartmm
also tell me sumthing,. why does the word "perfect" exist and is used in this conversation

Because some Latin speaking person made a word out of "per-" and "farcere" and it eventually found it's way into modern English.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
and you say that nuthing can be perfect{giving the impression that you actually KNOW what perfect is and hence can make the claim about all things in this world} and you and i can understand the meaning and significance of it , if indeed it is sumthing that can never be grasped and doesnt physically exist????

I never said I knew what was perfect. I said that you don't. Such knowledge is not possible for an imperfect being because you are not equipped to perceive or understand something outside of imperfection.

Simply my opinion.

^ no , i can just as easily forget the contradiction and accept the sontradicting premise FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT. then i can seperate the contradicting parts and make an argument based on an a single attribute without considering that the other is{for that sake of this specific hypothetical argument} automatically negating the possibility of it happening. as such the argument is not based in the contradiction but one of the traits which is not mutually exclusive of the other ones bit is impartial to the other ones.

"God is a comedian..."
--Voltaire

Originally posted by Mindship
"God is a comedian..."
--Voltaire

But if we laugh he'll kill us!

Originally posted by leonheartmm
it is a bad thing because it can not be falsified and hence it is not a logical argument but a superphilosophy.

Using logic in reference to a supreme, perfect entity is in itself futile and ridiculous, though.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
But if we laugh he'll kill us!

very good.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
But if we laugh he'll kill us!