God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-02-2013, 12:25 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
EK:
You didn't notice that my four dimensions post was signing off on how God couldn't exist before a Big Bang? Really? (Place sarcastic icon here).
And my level of comprehension has to do, apparently, with statements like (paraphrasing):
"Competition is still a part of Evolution, so let's not whine about compassion."
"PJ, you don't comprehend Evolution."
"Yup, you know for a fact that there are no other universes, so God couldn't have existed before a Big Bang."
"PJ, you know nothing about space/time."
Even the use of the word "nothing" shows these are just ad hom BS arguments. Grow up and display some facts and factual arguments or we'll let you vent while I ignore your posts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-02-2013, 02:51 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Just because something is omnipotent doesn't mean that it can't make itself weaker or less omnipotent if it so chooses.
For instance let's look at a superhero who has a MAX bench of 50 tons with both hands.
Using only one hand, he or she cannot move the weight.

A god could create a rock, reduce his own strength to a point where he could not lift it and yet still retain the ability to lift it once he returns his strength back to it's normal levels.

So yes, I think a god could create a rock that he couldn't lift.
It's not the weight of the rock that is in question, but instead it's the strength of the god that can vary.
If this god can do anything, then surely it can also become weaker or limit it's own knowledge.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 01:11 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(14-02-2013 12:25 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  EK:
You didn't notice that my four dimensions post was signing off on how God couldn't exist before a Big Bang? Really? (Place sarcastic icon here).
And my level of comprehension has to do, apparently, with statements like (paraphrasing):
"Competition is still a part of Evolution, so let's not whine about compassion."
"PJ, you don't comprehend Evolution."
"Yup, you know for a fact that there are no other universes, so God couldn't have existed before a Big Bang."
"PJ, you know nothing about space/time."
Even the use of the word "nothing" shows these are just ad hom BS arguments. Grow up and display some facts and factual arguments or we'll let you vent while I ignore your posts.


All of your counter arguments have consisted of some combination of false analogy and special pleading, so that is why your comprehension has been justly called into question. Calling out your stupid bullshit is not an ad hominem, it's calling out stupid bullshit.

Compassion can be explained by evolution, and we have provided evidence and argumentation that you just ignore. When you do that and continue to prattle on, I am well within my rights to call out your bullshit.

When you make assertions on the nature of reality without supporting evidence, we will call you out on it.

Quit acting like a butthurt little boy, and learn the basics of logic, argumentation, and the burden of proof. Being asked to present proof to somebody that has provided none, while ignoring all evidence presented to him, is the height of hypocrisy. Drinking Beverage

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 07:29 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Quote:Being asked to present proof to somebody that has provided none, while ignoring all evidence presented to him, is the height of hypocrisy.
My stance has reverted and I would have offered proof but there was no followup on that thread.
I'm really not interested in debating compassion in Evolution since it is a human emotion and arguably not observable in the animal world--if it is, taking pity is non-comprehensible unless you're Dr. Doolittle. You're the one guilty of special pleading--since humans show a wide range of emotional and philosphical states that are non-observable in the animal kingdom and Occam's Razor agrees we are much different than the animal kingdom by design, not random mutation.
Quote:Quit acting like a butthurt little boy, and learn the basics of logic, argumentation, and the burden of proof.
Calling me names and cursing at me are hardly sure-fire debate winners among adults. Pot and kettle.
I will reiterate my point from my last post that you ducked with your post, saying "grow up and learn how to debate" is not an answer; cursing at me is not a fact or reason based answer, pot and kettle here for sure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 07:50 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(15-02-2013 07:29 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Being asked to present proof to somebody that has provided none, while ignoring all evidence presented to him, is the height of hypocrisy.
My stance has reverted and I would have offered proof but there was no followup on that thread.
I'm really not interested in debating compassion in Evolution since it is a human emotion and arguably not observable in the animal world--if it is, taking pity is non-comprehensible unless you're Dr. Doolittle. You're the one guilty of special pleading--since humans show a wide range of emotional and philosphical states that are non-observable in the animal kingdom and Occam's Razor agrees we are much different than the animal kingdom by design, not random mutation.

There are many examples of compassion among animals.

You don't understand the principle of Occam's razor if you think that design is simpler than evolution. Humans differ in many ways from other animals, but only in degree. There is no human trait that is not present in some degree elsewhere in the animal kingdom.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
15-02-2013, 07:55 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(15-02-2013 07:29 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  My stance has reverted and I would have offered proof but there was no followup on that thread.
I'm really not interested in debating compassion in Evolution since it is a human emotion and arguably not observable in the animal world--if it is, taking pity is non-comprehensible unless you're Dr. Doolittle. You're the one guilty of special pleading--since humans show a wide range of emotional and philosphical states that are non-observable in the animal kingdom and Occam's Razor agrees we are much different than the animal kingdom by design, not random mutation.


You dumbass, you would find it if you even cared to look. Our closest relatives in the animal kingdom, the other Great Apes, show many of our emotions. They experience anger, love, compassion, humor, jealousy, and even self sacrifice. Chimpanzees have been documented trying to save other chimps from drowning, and dying in the process. Not only that, but the chimps being saved were not even the children, they were distantly related fellow members of the group; extended family at best.

Fortunately reality is not dependent on weather or not you accept it, reality just is; and that means in this case you are just fucking wrong. I'm even going to let the misuse of Occam's Razor slide, even though I've pointed that one out to you as well; apparently it didn't stick. If you wish to continue with this line of thought I will, but I'd also just as soon not have to pull out the latex gloves and bottle of Vaseline for you; they tend to make a mess of things.



(15-02-2013 07:29 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Calling me names and cursing at me are hardly sure-fire debate winners among adults. Pot and kettle.
I will reiterate my point from my last post that you ducked with your post, saying "grow up and learn how to debate" is not an answer; cursing at me is not a fact or reason based answer, pot and kettle here for sure.


Ridicule of the patently ridiculous is what I do, and if you tire from being the focus of my attention, I'd suggest you stop making unjustifiable claims. I'm not going to further debate the cutting edge of theoretical physics with you because I'm am not a theoretical physicists (same as you I imagine). I will however call out your bullshit if you try to talk out of your ass and use gaps in our current understanding to shoehorn your god into things.

I'm not here to be popular, I'm not here to be your friend. You say dumbfounded things time and again, and all I'm doing is pointing it out. But you have long since worn out any good will you had with me a few dozen posts ago, and thus I have elevated our discourse to the level used by The Living Dinosaur, and I take the same tone with you that I use with Pussycat IRC and Egor; and they are just as deserving of their ridicule. If there are others here that will continue to put up with your inane bullshit while maintaining a smile, they are far more patient than I. But I'm 99% sure that you're not going to change your mind, and that you're not worth the effort anyways.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 08:12 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Fucking hell...

The argument seems to be about which infinity is greater than the other. The "Making things" infinity or "Lifting things" infinity. so this being an argument of which infinity is greater than another infinity I can only say it seems very similar to pins on the end of an angel. (yes I know that's not the customary way of saying that) any discussion that speaks of more than one infinity simultaneously being applied to the same subject is bound to be insane and pointless... but then again I know nothing of infinity and having never heard a description of infinity that makes anything close to remote sense to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 08:42 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
There is no great defense against the proposed omnipotence, so there is no debate over this issue. What? God's omnipotence is limited to logic? It is logically possible for me to create something that I cannot lift. Why would God create logic that would limit him? If he did not create the logic, did the existence of such "logic" predate the existence of God? So religion shits out more poorly developed answers in exchange for even more difficult ones. PleaseJesus, there is no argument because you have absolutely nothing to present to defend it. Shut the fuck up and sit down.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 11:25 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Quote:You dumbass, you would find it if you even cared to look. Our closest relatives in the animal kingdom, the other Great Apes, show many of our emotions. They experience anger, love, compassion, humor, jealousy, and even self sacrifice. Chimpanzees have been documented trying to save other chimps from drowning, and dying in the process. Not only that, but the chimps being saved were not even the children, they were distantly related fellow members of the group; extended family at best.
I'm aware of all that and more. I'm aware that God created higher mammals with all these capacities and more. But the Atheist fallacies include adopting "compassion" as an animal trait because... I don't want to make this a semantic argument but "compassion" smacks of animals having ethics. The word we're looking for is symbiosis. Darwin wrote famously that what we call symbiosis undermines his theory. Darwin never knew what a pilot fish was--but had no excuse--Darwin forgot that CLEARLY dogs and cats and horses and 50 other animals are companions to people, even life-saving and life-enhancing companions.
Evolutionary "compassion"? No, but the Bible says Adam had companion animals but none suitable for a mate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2013, 11:31 AM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Occam's Razor - The application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion.[a] The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers also point out that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.
I think YOU don't understand burden of proof, explanatory power, and simplest.
I think some of you shouldn't be teachers, or lawyers, or doctors, or any profession that requires dealing with obstinate people.
Quote:If there are others here that will continue to put up with your inane bullshit while maintaining a smile, they are far more patient than I. But I'm 99% sure that you're not going to change your mind, and that you're not worth the effort anyways.
You are an exemplar of the lazy kind of Atheist even other Atheists despise, and thank God, Vosur and The Bearded Dude are nothing like you. Don't help the homeless like I do, or work with the retarded or elderly as I have, and don't--God forbid--be a Christian since you have no patience for anyone who shows the slightest bit of neediness or obstinacy. God forbid I should actually dare to ask you questions or quote the Bible to you. You're intellectually lazy IMHO.
Quote:Why would God create logic that would limit him?
You do know Christianity is God limiting many aspects of Himself? Why is your hypothetical God in a tiny box?
I posted before on this thread that my God is both able to not lift the rock and to lift it, though one is logical and one is illogical. The rock question is moot and now, some Atheists will think freely and some will (hopefully) get the rocks out their head. Toodles!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: