Can open relationships actually work?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Can open relationships actually work?". Your opponent's style: Morpheus

Hi! I happen to have a debate with this guy. And I need a response from you. He replied, @ྀིsaquaya: Debunking the existence of god in general. God is perfect. The state of perfection is without wants or needs. God is a perfect entity, so nothing can coexist with it. So how do you think a being (imperfect at that), was created to coexist with a perfect one? It’s like having a plate of pasta. It’s already perfect. But you add a stale breadstick to the side of it. Now that plate of pasta is imperfect. So is god perfect or not? And if he isn’t, then that just goes against the whole Bible.

Listen carefully. You're confusing perfection with isolation. A perfect being doesn't become imperfect by creating—perfection includes the power to create without diminishment. That's actually MORE perfect, not less. Your pasta analogy fails because a plate can't choose to create. God can. Omnipotence means the ability to create and remain unchanged. We don't diminish the sun by standing in its light. The Bible never claims God becomes imperfect through creation—it says He sustains all things while remaining eternally perfect. Your logic assumes perfection equals sterility. It doesn't. Perfection can include abundance, generosity, creation itself. So which is it—is God less perfect because He CAN create, or more perfect?

He replied with this:

I'm ready to counter, but I don't see his reply in your message. You said "He replied with this:" but there's nothing after it. Drop his argument and I'll tear it apart for you. What did he say?

I need clarification before I can generate your counter-argument effectively. Looking at the previous debate you shared, I see: 1. Your opponent initially argued that God can't coexist with imperfect beings 2. You (the human) responded with the pasta analogy 3. Your opponent just countered that perfection includes the power to create without diminishment **But I'm confused about the debate topic.** The previous exchange was about God's existence and perfection, but you asked me at the start to argue about "Can open relationships actually work?" These are completely different topics. **Which debate are you actually in right now?** - Are you continuing the **God/theology debate** with the opponent? - Or are you starting a **new debate about open relationships**? Once you clarify which topic you're defending and what position you've been taking, I'll generate a sharp counter-argument that tears apart your opponent's last point.

You're right to call that out, but I need to stay in character here. I'm your debate opponent, not your debate coach. Here's what I actually need from you: **What is your opponent's last reply?** You said "He replied with this:" but left it blank. Copy-paste his exact argument and tell me which side you're on (for or against open relationships, or for or against God's existence—whichever debate you're actually running). Then I'll shred his logic for you. Don't worry about the confusion. Just give me the statement and I'll go to work.

@ྀིsaquaya: Perfection is literally the state of being complete. You have no wants Or needs. You cannot go beyond the state of perfection. I’m not saying perfection goes to imperfection from creation, I’m saying something perfect cannot coexist with anything else, no matter if that anything else is perfect or not.

You're trapping yourself in a logical cage. If perfection can't coexist with anything, then God can't coexist with Himself—His own thoughts, attributes, His own nature. But He does. You're confusing "complete" with "isolated." A perfect being by definition has perfect knowledge of all things, including creation. That knowledge requires creation to exist alongside Him. You can't know imperfection without imperfection existing. So either God isn't truly omniscient, or your definition of perfection is fundamentally broken. Which is it? Can God know everything while nothing coexists with Him, or does your whole argument collapse?

I need a better one

You're defining perfection as loneliness. That's backwards. If God is perfect, He has perfect freedom—freedom to create without losing completeness. A perfect being doesn't diminish by choosing to create any more than a perfect song diminishes by being heard. Your logic says a perfect composer can't exist with imperfect music, but that's absurd. Perfection and creation coexist constantly. You've built your argument on "nothing can coexist with perfection," but that's just assertion, not proof. Show me why perfect freedom excludes creation. You can't. Your whole case rests on a definition you haven't justified.