A Perfect Being Cannot Exist

Good morning, everyone. Pro begins off by quoting William Lane Craig as if his word really has weight here, when it doesn't. He makes a long argument that seemingly makes sense, but I will show just the opposite, and how he basically does a straw man. Now follow along as I break down his argument and show you why it makes no sense.Counter Argument Against a Perfect Being (AKA God)"P1: If God exists, he is a perfect being"Yes, God is a perfect being, most certainly."P2: If a perfect being exists, his choices are consistent with 100% perfection" Sure. Of course, this is only natural and logical."P3: A being who makes choices consistent with 100% perfection, would not choose to shift reality from:(i) A reality consisting of 100% perfectionto(ii) A reality consisting of imperfection (less than 100% perfection)" This is where Pro completely misunderstands the idea of God and His creation. He seems to in his own way equate the creation with God, but this simply can't be. Both God and His creation are completely different and separate realities. "P4: If a perfect being exists, creating the universe would be shifting reality from (i) to (ii)" Well, no. It would not be, because it is not "shifting" any reality at all, the All-Mighty is "creating" a whole other reality besides Himself."Denial of this entails that either the universe and its entities is God, or that the universe is just as perfect. This destroys the notion of God. Therefore, the theist would have to concede that the universe and the entities it contains are imperfect. This means that if a perfect being exists; reality consisted of 100% perfection prior to the universe, while reality now consists of imperfection." Wrong, because both God and His creation are both different realities and entities, both of which are perfect. This is no way destroys the notion of God. But now we come to the real issue here, the real misunderstanding on Pro's part. He says "the theist would have to concede that the universe and the entities it contains are imperfect." I in no way see how this makes sense. Both God and His creation are separate and different realities. Both God and His creation are perfect realities. Pro has to show me how the entirely separate reality of creation is imperfect now. "P5: A perfect being would not choose to create the universe"Well, why not? A perfect reality that is God has created another perfect reality that is the universe. Logic would follow that a perfect reality (God) creating a perfect reality (Creation) is logically consistent."The argument is logically valid, so my guess is that my opponent is going to deny P4; as the other premises are extremely self-evident. The objection will probably be with regards to how the universe is perfect. Since the universe is perfect, then it would be compatible with a perfect being. Well, if the universe is completely perfect then either:(i) The universe is completely perfect, but has some imperfect parts(ii) The universe is completely perfect, and has all perfect parts" This is where Pro in his own way gives me a straw man. He has defined what perfect is under his own understanding, and that is not acceptable. In all reality, what this comes down to is the problem of evil, because I see everything in the universe as perfect. Let me basically counter the rest of what he said. God is a separate and perfect reality. Creation is a separate and perfect reality Therefore the perfect God creating a whole other perfect reality is logically consistent. Pro wants to nit-pick and say that every part within the creation must be perfect in order for this to be perfect, and gives an example of Charles Manson and saying that by comparing him to God would be irrational, but let me explain why Charles Manson is indeed a perfect part within the universe, a necessity in fact. God created the other reality, creation, as a test for sentient beings. Without evil, there can be no test. Without evil, the reality that is creation today is no longer that same reality. If you remove disease, evil and all of the like, you no longer have a test, because everything is good. If you remove disease, evil and all of the like, you no longer have true free will, because it would not be possible for man to be evil, such as the likes of Charles Manson. 4. Therefore to not create with evil would mean to not create the perfect reality for a test. 5. Therefore, by creating the possibility of people like Charles Manson, by creating good, neutral and evil in general, you create the perfect reality, in fact, said evil in all actuality is now a "perfect part" because of the intention behind creating the universe in the first place.Let me also explain something to those who are watching this debate. Everything is dependent upon everything else to exist. If you simply remove from creation just one element, you no longer have the same creation, at all. In fact, remove water, and all life is gone. Remove all of the carbon dioxide, and all life is gone, because trees use carbon dioxide for food and turn it into oxygen which all life that has lungs uses. Even if you remove the ability to create waste product from the universe, you no longer have the universe, because every animal produces waste, it is apart of its creation, and without this part, reality would not be reality, it would also become irrational, because many things produce waste, and that producing of waste is a necessity, a reality. So look at that, even "feces and urine" is a "perfect part" of our wonderful and perfect reality.Conclusion God is a perfect reality. Creation is a perfect reality with perfect parts. Therefore the perfect reality of God creating a different and separate perfect reality that is creation, with perfect parts, is logically consistent.