Originally posted by FeceMan
Did you not see my above post dealing with this paradox? I've heard all these arguements before, and, yes, they are incredibly difficult to explain. I guess we'll all learn when we die, eh?
Your previous post does nothing to solve this paradox, it simply evades it. When you present an argument that addresses ths paradox, I will address you.
Your previous post does nothing to solve this paradox, it simply evades it. When you present an argument that addresses ths paradox, I will address you.
It addresses the paradox--we see it as God can or cannot do something. This is from our limited point-of-view. God does things beyond our comprehension. He sees and understands it all at once and we cannot possibly do this.
Paradoxes are those things that we see as an impossibility. Of course, we see rain as being wet, so what do we know?
Originally posted by FeceMan
It addresses the paradox--we see it as God can or cannot do something. This is from our limited point-of-view. God does things beyond our comprehension. He sees and understands it all at once and we cannot possibly do this.Paradoxes are those things that we see as an impossibility. Of course, we see rain as being wet, so what do we know?
It is your position that this appears to be a paradox but is not a paradox at all. You have yet to provide any evidence to support this. You are simply trying to abdicate the limitations of God onto the limitations of humans. Try again.
Isnt a challenge considered something that is not fully understood?
Errrr...no?
For me, riding a horse is a challenge--I'm short and I find horses to be intimidating 🙂. For JM, the correct use of grammar is a challenge. For my dog, not running into things is a challenge. For a friend of mine, doing math problems is a challenge.
I fully understand how to ride a horse. JM (probably) understands the basics of correct grammar. My dog understands that running into things hurts (well, she's kind of a brick wall, so perhaps not). My friend knows how to do the math problems, but he has trouble connecting everything together.
Originally posted by FeceMan
YOU are simply trying to impose the limitations of humans onto God.
You are correct that not being all powerful is a limitation of human beings. However, all powerfullness is also not a characteristic of human beings.
The reason the paradox in question applies to God is because all powerfullness is a characteristic of God and therefore, He should not be limited in this way.
how can you consider the challenge of riding a
horse not understood? if you understood 100% there
wouldnt be an intimidation. (which Im pretty sure the
only reason intimidation exists is because of unknown
factors, like when some muscle dude is about to pound
ya, you take into consideration his mass and you doubt
yourself after becoming intimidated...so you know that
beating him up might be a challenge, although I know
theres some people who dont become intimidated, I just
figured I'd touch down on intimidation).
as for JM (and I dunno who the hell that is lol), the
grammar is a challenge because its proper concept
is not understood (only the social slacker usage of
the grammar is being typed by this person Im
assuming)
"Trouble connecting everything together" is (and Im
pretty sure) not understanding something heh.
Complete understanding is when there is no struggle
whatsoever (as Im sure we both agree).
I dont know, I hope I dont sound stubborn but I feel
strongly about challenges being something someone
doesnt fully understand (whether that be physically
or mentally).
If there were, say, alternate realities, or different dimensions or what have you, would they be lorded over by our God, or have there own all seeing, all powerful deity in charge? If so, if two all seeing, all powerful deities met, would they be able to challenge one another? And if different time-lines exist because of our universe, and each of those time lines had its own all powerful god, ergo God would have created a challenge.... of course this might be a dubious proposition.
Can God make a rock so big He can't pick it up?
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Ytaker>Congratulations on missing the point entirely. All powerfullness as a characteristic does not exist as it is a paradoxial impossibility. This means that an all powerful God does not exist or if you prefer, God exists but is not all powerful.
This is slightly logical, but it really misses the information vital to finish it.
It lacks vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of 😇His😇 nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does anything and everything else.
For example, I have human nature. I can manoeuvre. But, I cannot out manoeuvre a plane tomcatdue to the satellite support. The attribute of a human does not ever permit any human ever doing that. My ability to manoeuvre is connected to my nature and I cannot violate it. So too with God. His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence is not an entity of it’s own design, so it must be part of what he is, not who he is.
Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all-powerful. Also, He cannot cease to be God. Since He is in all places at all times, if He stopped existing then He wouldn't be in all places at all time. Obviously, he cannot cease to exist if he ever did exist.
The eventual point I’ll make is that God cannot do something that is a violation of His own existence and nature. honsequently, He cannot make a rock so big he can't pick up, or make something bigger than Himself, etc. But, this doesn't mean that the infinite guy is contradictory. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything that complies with his nature and desires, in his infinite amount of power. Obviously, this doesn't mean that he can contradict his own nature.
If He did something inconsistent with his nature, then he would be false, and counter/annihilate himself. So, if God were self contradictory, he wouldn't be true. Likewise, if He did something that violated his nature, like making a rock so big he can't pick it up, He would also not be true since that would be a self-contradiction. Since truth is not self-contradictory (the ultimate truth, the facts), neither is God, as if he were not true, then he would not be God. But God is true and not self-contradictory (we say, and you cannot contest that without logic, which you don't have), therefore, God cannot do something that violates His own nature.
If you don't accept it, look at it this way. Since he is infinite in size, he would have to make something that would be bigger than himself. Since it is his nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, he cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than he.
Plus there's the nature of that rock. They're formed over time (Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone, www.dictionary.com, i.e. takes time to form into any size, so it grows, and therefore cannot reach infinity any more than you can by adding one to any number as many times as you want) A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that God cannot pick up this rock, means, that he is not in fact picking up a rock. You atheists create some weird paradoxes.
You are asking for God to become self-contradictory as a proof he doesn't exist. Your assertion is illogical from the start. So what you are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. You want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid.
😎
how can you consider the challenge of riding a
horse not understood? if you understood 100% there
wouldnt be an intimidation. (which Im pretty sure the
only reason intimidation exists is because of unknown
factors, like when some muscle dude is about to pound
ya, you take into consideration his mass and you doubt
yourself after becoming intimidated...so you know that
beating him up might be a challenge, although I know
theres some people who dont become intimidated, I just
figured I'd touch down on intimidation).as for JM (and I dunno who the hell that is lol), the
grammar is a challenge because its proper concept
is not understood (only the social slacker usage of
the grammar is being typed by this person Im
assuming)I dont know, I hope I dont sound stubborn but I feel
strongly about challenges being something someone
doesnt fully understand (whether that be physically
or mentally).
I fully understand riding a horse. I KNOW that the horse will not decide to trample me or throw me off (well, there is a slim chance), and I KNOW that there is no reason to really be intimidated by its size, and yet I still am.
Jackie Malfoy (JM) probably understands grammar at a reasonable level, but she is too lazy to put it to good use. Much like those who use abbreviations like, "u" or "ur" instead of spelling out the words.
"Trouble connecting everything together" is (and Im
pretty sure) not understanding something heh.
Complete understanding is when there is no struggle
whatsoever (as Im sure we both agree).
Yes, you are correct, this was a poor example on my part.
Originally posted by Ytaker
Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything that complies with his nature and desires, in his infinite amount of power.
om·nip·o·tence n The state of having unlimited power; all powerful.
It would appear that omnipotence is the power to do all things.
Originally posted by Ytaker
If you don't accept it, look at it this way. Since he is infinite in size, he would have to make something that would be bigger than himself. Since it is his nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, he cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than he.Plus there's the nature of that rock. They're formed over time (Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone, i.e. takes time to form into any size, so it grows, and therefore cannot reach infinity any more than you can by adding one to any number as many times as you want) A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that God cannot pick up this rock, means, that he is not in fact picking up a rock. You atheists create some weird paradoxes.
You are asking for God to become self-contradictory as a proof he doesn't exist. Your assertion is illogical from the start. So what you are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. You want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid.
First, even if we assume that God is the creator of all things, it does not follow from this that He is infinite in size.
Second, nowhere in any definition of "rock" does it indicate that a rock cannot be infinitely large or that it cannot approach infinite size:
rock n.
1. Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone.
2.
a.) A relatively small piece or fragment of such material.
b.) A relatively large body of such material, as a cliff or peak.
3. A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant part of the earth's crust.
Let us emove God from the equation for a moment:
If omnipotence is an existent characteristic, then all tasks would be possible. Because some tasks are impossible, it follows from this that omnipotence is not an existent characteristic.
This means that if God exists, He is really really powerful but He is not all powerful which is the same as saying that an all powerful God does not exist.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
[b]om·nip·o·tence n The state of having unlimited power; all powerful.It would appear that omnipotence is the power to do all things.
First, even if we assume that God is the creator of all things, it does not follow from this that He is infinite in size.
Second, nowhere in any definition of "rock" does it indicate that a rock cannot be infinitely large or that it cannot approach infinite size:
rock n.
1. Relatively hard, **naturally formed** mineral or petrified matter; stone.
2.
a.) A relatively **small** piece or fragment of such material.
b.) A relatively **large** body of such material, as a cliff or peak.3. A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant **part of the earth's crust**.
Let us emove God from the equation for a moment:
If omnipotence is an existent characteristic, then all tasks would be possible. Because some tasks are impossible, it follows from this that omnipotence is not an existent characteristic.
This means that if God exists, He is really really powerful but He is not all powerful which is the same as saying that an all powerful God does not exist. [/B]
Infinite power require infinte size.
It isn't the power to overcome the nature of things though. Only to do all things within itself. Just as running doesn't mean that I can run faster than a cheetah, being omnipotent doesn't mean that God can overpower his own morals and will.
well like, if god can do anything, then could he make a rock that he couldnt lift? if he made it, he couldnt lift it. and that would be something he couldnt do. ive said to myself, when i get to heaven, im gonna ask god. but the thing is that ive already asked god, and hes already figured a way to do it, so god is perfect
Originally posted by fruits
well like, if god can do anything, then could he make a rock that he couldnt lift? if he made it, he couldnt lift it. and that would be something he couldnt do. ive said to myself, when i get to heaven, im gonna ask god. but the thing is that ive already asked god, and hes already figured a way to do it, so god is perfect
If a stone was unlimited, it wouldn't be a stone. A stone is naturally formed, and as “The Phantom Tolborne” book proved, you cannot reach infinity by any amount of steps.