God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-02-2013, 01:01 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 12:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 12:51 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  But, the logical coherence of the concept of omnipotence isn't the issue here... it's whether or not God is omnipotent.

And, you're incorrect... in our conscious, rational, logical way of humanly thinking there can be no such property. That's not to say that there is no such property. Within the known physical realm, the property is not possible.


So your response is special pleading. Drinking Beverage
It's not special pleading if it falls within the subject's parameters.

Pot and kettle, actually. You're special pleading because you're saying that omnipotence isn't a logical concept when talking about God's omnipotence.

I'll see your coffee and raise you a hobo. Hobo

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:15 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 01:01 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 12:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  So your response is special pleading. Drinking Beverage
It's not special pleading if it falls within the subject's parameters.

Pot and kettle, actually. You're special pleading because you're saying that omnipotence isn't a logical concept when talking about God's omnipotence.

I'll see your coffee and raise you a hobo. Hobo
So god is illogical? Consider

You are defining something for which there is no evidence so you can define your imaginary thing any way you choose.

Doesn't change the fact that defining an omnipotent being results in contradiction and logical incoherence, or the fact that you are simply defining it away.

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
08-02-2013, 01:19 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 01:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 01:01 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  It's not special pleading if it falls within the subject's parameters.

Pot and kettle, actually. You're special pleading because you're saying that omnipotence isn't a logical concept when talking about God's omnipotence.

I'll see your coffee and raise you a hobo. Hobo
So god is illogical? Consider

You are defining something for which there is no evidence so you can define your imaginary thing any way you choose.

Doesn't change the fact that defining an omnipotent being results in contradiction and logical incoherence, or the fact that you are simply defining it away.
I'm not defining it in any way.

The parameters of the discussion are based around the concept of God's omnipotence.

It's the same old same old, Chas...

A: Hey, let's discuss the Bible.
T: Ok, what do you want to discuss?
A: I don't know... ummm creation?
T: Sure. Well, in the Bible it sta...
A: IT DOESN'T MATTER, THE BIBLE IS FICTION!

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:20 PM
RE: God's Omnipitance - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 11:33 AM)Egor Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 06:11 AM)hedgehog648 Wrote:  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.

You're thinking too concretely. I know that probably sounds like a compliment, but in the mental health world, its a term used to describe people with mental diminishment, because people should be able to think and understand things abstractly.

We're not even talking about a rock. We're talking about whether an omnipotent being can limit himself. And yes, he can. He must be able to or he is not omnipotent. In that instance, the limit becomes an expression of the omnipotence. But once you grasp that, you immediately confront various levels of "reality." Because in creating that rock, God has created an alterior reality where that rock resides, and then your starting to get into my territory, which is monism. Can God create a dualistic system within His monistic nature, and again, the answer is yes. It is the same thing as creating a rock too heavy to lift. And thus we come back full circle to the original speculation.

You say I'm dumb, but you haven't even displayed a sufficient ability for abstract reasoning to tackle the very question you asked. You don't even understand the importance of what you asked. You're like some caveman who's only application for the wheel is on a child's toy. Behind the question of the too-big rock is a full understanding of creation, but you think it's a logical argument against the existence of God. You're a child. If I were you, I'd just drop the question; it's not doing you a bit of good.

As for when I'm leaving: right now my forum has no traffic, which is how I intend it, for now. I have a series of videos to make over the next few weeks. I have to figure the best way to promote it, and establish a work flow. I can't be debating while I'm building. You'll notice I haven't started any new posts here either. But, I can come over here and exercise my wits. Yesterday, we tested out the video and audio equipment. Next week we will put together the set, and I will start making the ten-part YouTube series on what is Veridicanism. Boring, yes, but it has to be in place in the Library, and it will get me back into the swing of public speaking.

Right now, I have to start cleaning up this office. I have coffee cups, scraps of paper, notes, you name it. I have been working very hard this week on getting things ready. Easter isn't until March 31st, but I have a lot to do.

After that, I will be transitioning away. Obviously, there's going to come a time when I will only have time to attend to my own forum. I can't donate to this site anymore, apparently, so there's no reason for me to be here.

Anyway...you asked. Drinking Beverage
Alright then, lets generalise the question and forget the rock.

Can God limit himself?

You argue that he can because if he does not then he is not omnipotent, which is true. However this shows that God does have limits - if he didn't then he wouldn't have been able to create the limits in the first place. And anything with limits is not omnipotent.

Your talk of alternate realities is special pleading, nothing more. He has to create the rock in this reality, or he is not omnipotent (since you seem to be implying that he cannot do this). And then he can't lift the rock. So he is not omnipotent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:24 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 01:19 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 01:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  So god is illogical? Consider

You are defining something for which there is no evidence so you can define your imaginary thing any way you choose.

Doesn't change the fact that defining an omnipotent being results in contradiction and logical incoherence, or the fact that you are simply defining it away.
I'm not defining it in any way.

The parameters of the discussion are based around the concept of God's omnipotence.

It's the same old same old, Chas...

A: Hey, let's discuss the Bible.
T: Ok, what do you want to discuss?
A: I don't know... ummm creation?
T: Sure. Well, in the Bible it sta...
A: IT DOESN'T MATTER, THE BIBLE IS FICTION!
If you are simply assuming the truth of the Bible, then we're back to an angels on the head of a pin discussion.

If, however, you were able to use critical thinking to question that assumption, then you would see that your assumption simply isn't true. The God of your definition can't logically exist.

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
08-02-2013, 01:30 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(21-08-2012 09:50 AM)Chas Wrote:  The whole discussion of omnipotence presupposes the existence of the being for which there is no evidence. Mental masturbation.

Just sayin', Chas. Drinking Beverage

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:34 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 01:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 01:19 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  I'm not defining it in any way.

The parameters of the discussion are based around the concept of God's omnipotence.

It's the same old same old, Chas...

A: Hey, let's discuss the Bible.
T: Ok, what do you want to discuss?
A: I don't know... ummm creation?
T: Sure. Well, in the Bible it sta...
A: IT DOESN'T MATTER, THE BIBLE IS FICTION!
If you are simply assuming the truth of the Bible, then we're back to an angels on the head of a pin discussion.

If, however, you were able to use critical thinking to question that assumption, then you would see that your assumption simply isn't true. The God of your definition can't logically exist.
I'm not getting into this again... but OF COURSE the assumption is that the Bible is true. We're talking about the God that in the Bible... about His properties in the Bible...

Saying "Welp, no, Bible is untrue. Case closed." is pointless, lazy, and adds nothing to the discussion.

Also, given my definition of God, why is it logically impossible?

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:35 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 12:39 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  It's really a dumb paradox, honestly... as it redefines omnipotence and creates specific limitations that are non-existent to God.



ie

You can't put limitations on omnipotence; thus, the paradox is nonexistent.



If there are limitations on omnipotence, then it's not omnipotent... like I said, redefining omnipotence to fit the paradox.
So what you are saying is:

1) There are no limitations on omnipotence.
2) The paradox shows that limits can be placed on the property of omnipotence by that very same property itself.
3) God is omnipotent.
4) Therefore the paradox is stupid.


(08-02-2013 12:51 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  But, the logical coherence of the concept of omnipotence isn't the issue here... it's whether or not God is omnipotent.


And, you're incorrect... in our conscious, rational, logical way of humanly thinking there can be no such property. That's not to say that there is no such property. Within the known physical realm, the property is not possible.
So within the known physical realm, omnipotence is impossible. Therefore in the known physical realm, God is either not omnipotent or non existent yes?
So in order for you to say yes God is omnipotent, you would have to show that there does actually exist another realm where the rules of logic do not apply and omnipotence is possible, and then further show that God actually exists there.

(08-02-2013 01:19 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  The parameters of the discussion are based around the concept of God's omnipotence.
Bolded text for funsies. Is this not a contradiction? Surely the logical coherence of the concept of God's omnipotence is relevant to the discussion of the concept of God's omnipotence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:37 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
Some theist once said that the "heavy rock" paradox was as nonsense as "if we descended from apes why are there still apes?".

(Hello KC!)

DISCLAIMER: If you find a message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a message, complain to me and I will be happy to demonstrate.

[Image: tta.php]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 01:41 PM
RE: God's Omnipotence - The heavy rock paradox
(08-02-2013 01:34 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 01:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  If you are simply assuming the truth of the Bible, then we're back to an angels on the head of a pin discussion.

If, however, you were able to use critical thinking to question that assumption, then you would see that your assumption simply isn't true. The God of your definition can't logically exist.
I'm not getting into this again... but OF COURSE the assumption is that the Bible is true. We're talking about the God that in the Bible... about His properties in the Bible...

Saying "Welp, no, Bible is untrue. Case closed." is pointless, lazy, and adds nothing to the discussion.

Also, given my definition of God, why is it logically impossible?
Given your definition of God, it is your definition of God that is logically inconsistent.

You are not using critical thinking when you refuse to question your assumptions.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: