An unanswerable question?

  • Thread starter Thread starter debgab
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AntiTheist said:
The question reveals that the idea of omnipotence is inherently contradictory and cannot exist.

If someone wishes to redefine “omnipotence” to mean “the ability to do anything that is not logically contradictory,” then you’ve stated that your god is subject to the laws of logic.

If he created the laws of logic, then he should not be subject to them. If he did not create them, then those laws exist all by themselves and are more powerful than god.

Some theists like to argue, “Well, the laws of logic are just god’s nature.” Great – more word games. Ok, so did god create his own nature? If he created and chose what his nature was, then he’s not subject to it and he can violate it; if he didn’t create and choose his own nature, then he’s not totally free – he’s bound by something that he didn’t create.

Choose your poison – either way, the idea of omnipotence is inherently contradictory and cannot exist.
Click to expand...
excuse me while i wipe my brains off the wall, because sir, you blew my mind 👍
 
lemondiesel said:
excuse me while i wipe my brains off the wall, because sir, you blew my mind 👍
Click to expand...
That’s not exactly fair (I’m talking about antitheist) because he used his own definition of omnipotence. In other words, he used the definition that would make omnipotence logically impossible.

Now let’s see how this argument plays out using a dictionary definition:
According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, omnipotence is defined as “an agency or force of unlimited power”- Descartes shares the same definition. As shown above, Descartes’ definition of omnipotence is invulnerable to the paradox of the stone. Therefore, God can make a stone so large he can’t lift it and Divine Omnipotence is uncompromised.
 
coolduude said:
That’s not exactly fair (I’m talking about antitheist) because he used his own definition of omnipotence. In other words, he used the definition that would make omnipotence logically impossible.

Now let’s see how this argument plays out using a dictionary definition:
According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, omnipotence is defined as “an agency or force of unlimited power”- Descartes shares the same definition. As shown above, Descartes’ definition of omnipotence is invulnerable to the paradox of the stone. Therefore, God can make a stone so large he can’t lift it and Divine Omnipotence is uncompromised.
Click to expand...
soooooooooo an infinite god can create an infinite+1 size object? Isn’t that already stating that infinity isn’t infinite? (lol sorry I am under the influence of mary jane and this thread is BOMB to read)
 
lemondiesel said:
soooooooooo an infinite god can create an infinite+1 size object? Isn’t that already stating that infinity isn’t infinite? (lol sorry I am under the influence of mary jane and this thread is BOMB to read)
Click to expand...
Well, according to Descartes’ definition (which is also the dictionary’s definition, keep in mind) ‘…any attempt to disprove God’s existence using logic is hopeless. If God can do the logically impossible, then he can both create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it, and lift it, and so can do all things. Yes, there’s a contradiction in this, but so what? God can, on this understanding of omnipotence, make contradictions true.’
 
coolduude said:
Well, according to Descartes’ definition (which is also the dictionary’s definition, keep in mind) ‘…any attempt to disprove God’s existence using logic is hopeless. If God can do the logically impossible, then he can both create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it, and lift it, and so can do all things. Yes, there’s a contradiction in this, but so what? God can, on this understanding of omnipotence, make contradictions true.’
Click to expand...
So can this infinite God create another equal (or even greater) God? I mean if we can’t even understand this one God, what if he made another-it is logically impossible isn’t it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top