God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox

[Julius]

(07-02-2013 11:57 PM)Egor Wrote:  What is an "unregistered" user? How can they post?

Anyway, this is a stupid paradox. If God creates a rock He cannot lift, He's only omnipotent so long as He can't lift it. The omnipotence is proved by his inability to lift that particular rock. This is not even a paradox.

The real question is has He ever done so? And in a way, yes, He has.

The human being is created and is capable of choosing to move toward God or away. It really is about the only free choice we have. In order for that kind of spirit to exist, however, God has to give up both the ability to force it and to know ahead of time what will occur. It becomes a dark place in His mind He is not able to go to. This is, by the way, what is symbolized in the idea of God dying for us. In order to create a human being, he has to give up part of Himself. If the human being moves toward God, there is great glory to be had. God, Himself, is amplified by it and it becomes a net gain unto Him.

I pity the human who makes the wrong choice.

Hey....you seem to know a lot about what's on your God's mind. Are you really sure? How could you know?

Julius

[Bucky Ball]

(07-02-2013 11:57 PM)Egor Wrote:  I pity the human who makes the wrong choice.

The thing is, even in Moral Theology, if the choice is sincere, and honestly made, even the religions of the world say one is not condemned. So Egsy's god appears to be a bit more capricious than most. He gave them brains, and expects them to use them, and if they do, "oops" they go ta hell. Right. Nice god that.

[Free Thought]

(08-02-2013 01:14 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 11:57 PM)Egor Wrote:  I pity the human who makes the wrong choice.

The thing is, even in Moral Theology, if the choice is sincere, and honestly made, even the religions of the world say one is not condemned. So Egsy's god appears to be a bit more capricious than most. He gave them brains, and expects them to use them, and if they do, "oops" They go ta hell. Right. Nice god that.

No god, is a nice god.

[Egor]

(08-02-2013 12:31 AM)Julius Wrote:  Hey....you seem to know a lot about what's on your God's mind. Are you really sure? How could you know?

Julius

Because I'm in touch with God. I have been since I was nine years old. He's my Father. I don't care if the old dead atheists don't believe me; it's a fact. It always has been.

You should listen to me, and that's a fact, too. And I don't care if that sounds arrogant or even delusional; it's a fact. There's no time left for pulling punches. I'm going to die when I'm 82 (I know that as well), and that only leaves me...let's see...34 years. And that's not a lot of time to teach people what they need to know.

[Egor]

(08-02-2013 01:14 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The thing is, even in Moral Theology, if the choice is sincere, and honestly made, even the religions of the world say one is not condemned. So Egsy's god appears to be a bit more capricious than most. He gave them brains, and expects them to use them, and if they do, "oops" They go ta hell. Right. Nice god that.

You're wasting your time judging God. And you're an utter fool if you think He's going to respect your atheism--especially when you know better. In fact, when I launch my ministry on Easter, one of the first "proofs" of God I'm going to post in the forum is the argument that shows you actually do believe in God. Your atheism is nothing but rebellion.

[Free Thought]

(08-02-2013 01:43 AM)Egor Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 01:14 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The thing is, even in Moral Theology, if the choice is sincere, and honestly made, even the religions of the world say one is not condemned. So Egsy's god appears to be a bit more capricious than most. He gave them brains, and expects them to use them, and if they do, "oops" They go ta hell. Right. Nice god that.

You're wasting your time judging God. And you're an utter fool if you think He's going to respect your atheism--especially when you know better. In fact, when I launch my ministry on Easter, one of the first "proofs" of God I'm going to post in the forum is the argument that shows you actually do believe in God. Your atheism is nothing but rebellion.

The argument that we believe in god? Oh that's refreshing.

Turned into a presuppositionalist now? Still flipping, even now.

[pxlgirl]

(08-02-2013 01:43 AM)Egor Wrote:  You're wasting your time judging God. And you're an utter fool if you think He's going to respect your atheism--especially when you know better. In fact, when I launch my ministry on Easter, one of the first "proofs" of God I'm going to post in the forum is the argument that shows you actually do believe in God. Your atheism is nothing but rebellion.

In fact, you're wasting your time on judging atheists.

[EvolutionKills]

(08-02-2013 01:43 AM)Egor Wrote:  In fact, when I launch my ministry on Easter, one of the first "proofs" of God I'm going to post in the forum is the argument that shows you actually do believe in God.

[hedgehog648]

(07-02-2013 11:57 PM)Egor Wrote:  What is an "unregistered" user? How can they post?

Anyway, this is a stupid paradox. If God creates a rock He cannot lift, He's only omnipotent so long as He can't lift it. The omnipotence is proved by his inability to lift that particular rock. This is not even a paradox.

The real question is has He ever done so? And in a way, yes, He has.

The human being is created and is capable of choosing to move toward God or away. It really is about the only free choice we have. In order for that kind of spirit to exist, however, God has to give up both the ability to force it and to know ahead of time what will occur. It becomes a dark place in His mind He is not able to go to. This is, by the way, what is symbolized in the idea of God dying for us. In order to create a human being, he has to give up part of Himself. If the human being moves toward God, there is great glory to be had. God, Himself, is amplified by it and it becomes a net gain unto Him.

I pity the human who makes the wrong choice.

Dafuq?

Of course it is a paradox. Either God can create a rock he cannot lift, or he cannot.

If he cannot, then he is not omnipotent.

If he can, then he is unable to lift the rock. The inability to do something, whatever that thing may be, even if it was a desired result of a different action shows that there is something he cannot do. Hence he is not omnipotent.

Congratulations Egor, your sentence "The omnipotence is proved by his inability to lift that particular rock" is possibly the stupidest thing I have ever read. And I've read this http://www.eminethe1st.blogspot.co.uk/20...chive.html.

That is how stupid that was. You may as well have said "The ability to do anything is proved by the inability to do something."

I thought you were leaving anyway? o.0

[hedgehog648]

(08-02-2013 01:43 AM)Egor Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 01:14 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The thing is, even in Moral Theology, if the choice is sincere, and honestly made, even the religions of the world say one is not condemned. So Egsy's god appears to be a bit more capricious than most. He gave them brains, and expects them to use them, and if they do, "oops" They go ta hell. Right. Nice god that.

You're wasting your time judging God. And you're an utter fool if you think He's going to respect your atheism--especially when you know better. In fact, when I launch my ministry on Easter, one of the first "proofs" of God I'm going to post in the forum is the argument that shows you actually do believe in God. Your atheism is nothing but rebellion.

Sorry Egor, your other quote was more stupid than this one. You need to try harder if you're going to break your record.