Is this a valid argument against an omnipotent being? Discuss.




And please, don't just moan "OMG RELIGION DEBATES DONE TO DEATH" or "These debates always just rehash the same stuff", because A) We almost always bring something new to the table because we're all better debaters and can make new and more challenging arguments B) I haven't made a religion debate thread in ages, and C) These debates are consistantly the most spirited.

Of course, but the rock would be so large it would lift itself.

Understand?

For ****'s sake, come on. This is just pulling a Homer Simpson.

Quote from Nodd

Of course, but the rock would be so large it would lift itself.

Understand?

Wrong. The concept of "lifting" requires that an object be within the hold of a much larger object's gravitational field, so that we can define the direction opposite the source of the gravity relative to the rock as being "up". We need merely add that god create another object with gravity that is also too strong for him.


And your exercise in semantics doesn't change the logical conundrum of ompipotence that this argument points out. If we change this to "Can god create a bar of steel that he can't bend", it poses the same problem.

Quote from ScHaLL

For ****'s sake, come on. This is just pulling a Homer Simpson.

Instead of calling the argument absurd and not providing any sort of counter-argument, why not actually explain how this is not a logical contradiction of omnipotence.

Quote from Ash

Is this a valid argument against an omnipotent being? Discuss.

Nah.

I'm not a religious guy by any means, but even if I was this argument gives off the same feeling as the ever popular "if a tree falls" question...

It's a paradoxical question, there is little more to it than that. Even if a god exists, there is no real way to measure what the extent of it's power would be.

...not to mention that if the god created the earth, and by "lifting" we're assuming on earth, I would also assume that god is stronger than the force of gravity and could probably lift anything.

...unless of course god manipulated the downward force of gravity >.>

In that case, would the size of the object really matter? No.

Rambling semantics aside, it isn't a good argument because it doesn't disprove anything, the only thing it proves is that it's impossible for humans to comprehend a solution to such a paradox.

Just be glad god gave you the ability to try and prove he doesn't exist.

Quote from Nodd

Just be glad god gave you the ability to try and prove he doesn't exist.

Assuming that it was him (or her, or it) and not nature?

Quote from Fr0zEnPh0eNiX

Nah.

I'm not a religious guy by any means, but even if I was this argument gives off the same feeling as the ever popular "if a tree falls" question...

It's a paradoxical question, there is little more to it than that. Even if a god exists, there is no real way to measure what the extent of it's power would be.

...not to mention that if the god created the earth, and by "lifting" we're assuming on earth, I would also assume that god is stronger than the force of gravity and could probably lift anything.

...unless of course god manipulated the downward force of gravity >.>

In that case, would the size of the object really matter? No.

Rambling semantics aside, it isn't a good argument because it doesn't disprove anything, the only thing it proves is that it's impossible for humans to comprehend a solution to such a paradox.

The point here is to point out that omipotence carries with it a paradox, and is therefore logically impossible.

Quote from Fr0zEnPh0eNiX

Assuming that it was him (or her, or it) and not nature?

No. Assuming that God is anything..

@ Ash:

We're talking about God here. He can lift shit without lifting it. Smart ass.

Quote from Ash

The point here is to point out that omipotence carries with it a paradox, and is therefore logically impossible.

logically based off the rules we are able to comprehend which comes from the
"laws" humanity over time has created... or observed.

Not to discredit them. If a being was truly omnipotent this sort of question wouldn't apply because one could assume that this being could change the rules at any time on a whim.

Quote from Fr0zEnPh0eNiX

Assuming that it was him (or her, or it) and not nature?

Quote from Ash

The point here is to point out that omipotence carries with it a paradox, and is therefore logically impossible.

When it comes to God, logic doesn't matter. God is logic. You're just ignorant.

Quote from Nodd

When it comes to God, logic doesn't matter. God is logic. You're just ignorant.

You assume a lot.

I never said god didn't exist, nor did I say that god did exist.

I just openly question the existence of a god because it makes more sense to do that than the blindly believe or disbelieve.

Following something absolutely and without truly analyzing it from another perspective and truly considering that point of view.. to me... is ignorance.

Not to say that you are, but to call me ignorant for my methods is ignorant =)

So god can make a square circle?

Quote from Ash

So god can make a square circle?

More than likely, we would just not have the capacity to comprehend it.

If there's a God I'm sure he/it/her can do whatever he/it/her wants lol.