The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
Obviously, some people have evolved with an inability to admit the irrationality of their positions.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Could God create something so big even HE couldn't move it???
- Thread starter What is the Bible
- Start date
Obviously, some people have evolved with an inability to admit the irrationality of their positions.
enchanted_one1975
Resident Lycanthrope
I would be willing to bet that I am not the only one here that has created a turd so big that it could not be passed without the loss of blood. This, in itself, is proof that any being can create something that is pretty much unmovable. I just don't know if a God deserves the credit for the cheese required to make such a turd. Oh, sure it moves through eventually (and very painfully), but there is movement within the universe as well. There is pain in the universe as well. Heck, the world might just be one big oversized turd, come to think of it. Do I thank God or blame God?
tarasan
Well-Known Member
you thank him silly! at least in my opinion you do.
DarkSun
:eltiT
If God were omniscient, he would be able to figure out how to do something seemingly illogical.
If God were omnipotent, he would have the power to do anything, whether that action seems possible or not.
tarasan
Well-Known Member
your ignoring the definitions of omniscients that I am using. Using a diferent definition that I am using to prove me wrong I dont believe works very well..
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Any definition of omnipotence that has restrictions is not omnipotence.
tarasan
Well-Known Member
then you should ask them to remove the definitions in philisophical journals
DarkSun
:eltiT
I would frubal this, but apparently I have to spread them around first.
In other words, you're acknowledging that it is illogical for God to be omnipotent, given that omnipotence literally means "all-powerful"?
So what you've done is limited God's power to that which is logically possible? That's interesting...
Last edited:
VeganCrustAtheist
Member
Wow, I'm impressed. That actually works. I still don't believe in god, but my god, you stumped me. Nice job!:bow:
tarasan
Well-Known Member
but we done ascribe omnipotience to mean that in my religion, this kind of thing was rejected near the very start by people like plato, like everything else it has evolved, people havnt believed that definition really sense Platos time, at least anyone who has read theology, so no Im not acknowledging it, Im telling you to read the subject matter rather than take a simple misconception and assume it.
DarkSun
:eltiT
Omnipotence:
- Unlimited power; commonly attributed to a deity or deities
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/omnipotence
- The concept that God has infinite power; he is able to do anything that he wishes that is consistent with his own personality.
www.translationdirectory.com/glossaries/glossary007_o.htm
- Omnipotence is all-powerfulness. Many religions view God as omnipotent. Descartes discusses the possibility of an omnipotent demon who could ...
www.abdn.ac.uk/philosophy/guide/glossary.shtml
You don't seem to be using the word "omnipotent" correctly ...
Perhaps if you used a word that doesn't mean "all-powerful", everything would be okay.
What you're describing is a God who isn't omnipotent, because He is limited to what is logically possible.
No, it doesn't work. Infinity doesn't necessarily equal infinity.
tarasan
Well-Known Member
Omnipotence:
- Unlimited power; commonly attributed to a deity or deities
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/omnipotence- The concept that God has infinite power; he is able to do anything that he wishes that is consistent with his own personality.
www.translationdirectory.com/glossaries/glossary007_o.htm- Omnipotence is all-powerfulness. Many religions view God as omnipotent. Descartes discusses the possibility of an omnipotent demon who could ...
www.abdn.ac.uk/philosophy/guide/glossary.shtml
You don't seem to be using the word "omnipotent" correctly ...
Perhaps if you used a word that doesn't mean "all-powerful", everything would be okay.
What you're describing is a God who isn't omnipotent, because He is limited to what is logically possible.
erm check your second thought of what pmnipotient is
all powerful and does what he is that is consistant with his own personallity, so what i say is that doing logically impossible things and evil things is against his personality and the order he has set down, youve just refuted yourself with your own definition!
tarasan
Well-Known Member
cake is awesome No one is disagreeing with that, cause its a fact.
tarasan
Well-Known Member
Omnipotence:
- Unlimited power; commonly attributed to a deity or deities
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/omnipotence- The concept that God has infinite power; he is able to do anything that he wishes that is consistent with his own personality.
www.translationdirectory.com/glossaries/glossary007_o.htm- Omnipotence is all-powerfulness. Many religions view God as omnipotent. Descartes discusses the possibility of an omnipotent demon who could ...
www.abdn.ac.uk/philosophy/guide/glossary.shtml
You don't seem to be using the word "omnipotent" correctly ...
Perhaps if you used a word that doesn't mean "all-powerful", everything would be okay.
What you're describing is a God who isn't omnipotent, because He is limited to what is logically possible.
also if you look back at the definitions of omnipotience that I gave you would see its not as clear cut as u describe, unless you can show that the source is bad.
The second definition is a bad one. Our abilities aren't limited by our personalities. Just because I'm unwilling to do something doesn't mean that I'm incapable of it.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
I would modify the question to get around the size, make it a rock a certain shape and size that is no different than any other rock except god cannot move it.
Really, it wouldn't matter whether the object couldn't be moved or if it was infinite and had no where to be moved to, because the core of the question isn't about moving an object, it is to demonstrate that omnipotence is impossible, and I think this question does that quite well. A more direct question that removes any analogy or interpretation could be "can an omnipotent god choose to not be omnipotent?" with this, like the immovable object question, whether the answer is yes or no, the outcome is that omnipotence doesn't exist. It cancels itself out. Just about any absolute can be cancelled out in the same way.