Originally posted by h1a8
Omnipotent doesn't mean able to do all things.
Omnipotent means able to do anything logically possible.
Otherwise being Omnipotent is illogical and cannot happen.It's logically impossible to be abstract and non abstract at the same time.
It's logically impossible to draw a square-circle.
But It is logically possible for human like beings to have wings and be able to fly (it's just factually impossible).
Definition of OMNIPOTENT
1
: one who has unlimited power or authority : one who is omnipotent
2
capitalized : god 1
Who said the rules of logic had to apply? You can do anything you want. Otherwise, you are placing limits on unlimited power. Which means that you are limited.
Originally posted by carver9It was some type of substance all around Hulk. As shown in colors.
It was NOTHING in front of Hulk when he punched. Nothing, zero, nada. Now provide a scan showing something "physical" in front of him.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Definition of OMNIPOTENT1
: one who has unlimited power or authority : one who is omnipotent
2
capitalized : god 1Who said the rules of logic had to apply? You can do anything you want. Otherwise, you are placing limits on unlimited power. Which means that you are limited.
Originally posted by h1a8
Omnipotent doesn't mean able to do all things.
Originally posted by the Darkone
Omnipotent means all powerful unlimited power can do whatever and when ever, no limit in a nutshell.
Nope. Self contradictions cannot exist.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Yes, its a limit.You wanted to cling to definitions. Well, this is what happens...
If you're not able to do something, you are limited.
It's not a limit. Self contradictions can't exist. If you define something one way then you just can't use a contradictory definition to define it.
By your definition an omnipotent being can't exist. Here's the proof:
1. Can an omnipotent being created a boulder so heavy that he cannot lift?
a. If yes, then he's not omnipotent since he can't lift the boulder.
b. If no, then he's not omnipotent sine he can't create such a boulder.
That's why I said the illogical is not a limit. It preserves omnipotence.
Originally posted by h1a8facepalm
1. Can an omnipotent being created a boulder so heavy that he cannot lift?a. If yes, then he's not omnipotent since he can't lift the boulder.
b. If no, then he's not omnipotent sine he can't create such a boulder.
In essence you are asking if omnipotence is not omnipotence. You may think this is clever, but it is actually nonsensical. It violates the fundamental principle of all thought: the law of non-contradiction. A=A, case closed. Saying omnipotence=/=omnipotence makes as much sense as saying that A=/=A. Your question is the equivalent of asking "Goo Goo gobbledeeewonka snork!?" It makes no sense. How about I ask you if the chair you are sitting on is a chair? I might think I am clever, but you would see very clearly how much of a fool I am. Point: it is idiotic to try and quantify infinite power through the use of very finite analogies. We are human beings. We cannot wrap our heads around omnipotence-- if we could, it'd defeat the concept of omnipotence all together.
The dumbed down answer to your 'question' is that an omnipotent being both can, and cannot lift the boulder. Simple.
Originally posted by Galan007
facepalmIn essence you are asking if omnipotence is not omnipotence. You may think this is clever, but it is actually nonsensical. It violates the fundamental principle of all thought: the law of non-contradiction. A=A, case closed. Saying omnipotence=/=omnipotence makes as much sense as saying that A=/=A. Your question is the equivalent of asking "Goo Goo gobbledeeewonka snork!?" It makes no sense. How about I ask you if the chair you are sitting on is a chair? I might think I am clever, but you would see very clearly how much of a fool I am. Point: it is idiotic to try and quantify infinite power through the use of very finite analogies. We are human beings. We cannot wrap our heads around omnipotence-- if we could, it'd defeat the concept of omnipotence all together.
The dumbed down answer to your 'question' is that an omnipotent being both can, and cannot lift the boulder. Simple.
👆
Originally posted by Galan007
facepalmIn essence you are asking if omnipotence is not omnipotence. You may think this is clever, but it is actually nonsensical. It violates the fundamental principle of all thought: the law of non-contradiction. A=A, case closed. Saying omnipotence=/=omnipotence makes as much sense as saying that A=/=A. Your question is the equivalent of asking "Goo Goo gobbledeeewonka snork!?" It makes no sense. How about I ask you if the chair you are sitting on is a chair? I might think I am clever, but you would see very clearly how much of a fool I am. Point: it is idiotic to try and quantify infinite power through the use of very finite analogies. We are human beings. We cannot wrap our heads around omnipotence-- if we could, it'd defeat the concept of omnipotence all together.
The dumbed down answer to your 'question' is that an omnipotent being both can, and cannot lift the boulder. Simple.
Checkmate 👆
Which goes back to the original point.
If you want to cling to definitions, black is always black, and if its grey, FU, then yeah, Doom with limitless Plutonian power wins.
If you don't want to, and say, fine, in comics, sometimes they use terminology which we can't apply real world logic to (infinite Hulk strength, limitless Plutonian strength, abstracts), then Doom with Plutonian powers wins.