On the omnipotence and supremity of God - Page 3 - VGF

**Dr. Horrible** · 03-10-2006, 02:32 PM

The entire argument is a word game. "Can an all powerful being do what cannot be done? If so, then it is not something that cannot be done and he is not all powerful. Aren't I clever?"

Either the term "all powerful" is meaningless because to be there are requirements to being considered all powerful, or it is not meaningless and an all powerful thing can do what does not make sense.

Princess Zelda of Hyrule · 03-10-2006, 06:41 PM

It's useless applying logic to the God who invented logic.

**Prince Toad** · 03-10-2006, 08:32 PM

Grah. None of this makes sense. Part of the reason I can't accept organized religion. I could deal with a God that has no physical limits, but has logical limits-- sure, he can lift anything, but he can't make a rock he can't lift, explicitly because he can lift anything. He could create the world, and maybe things like constants in most chemical and mathematical equations (there's no hard logic behind Avogadro's number, that's just how it is), but not the laws of logic. It is not possible for something to be and not be. That doesn't jive with my view of how anything can be, divine or otherwise. Is that because God said so? No-- in none of an infinity of universes is it possible for something to be and not be.

And anyway, where do these ideas come from? Who decided God could make a square circle? (Also impossible. Squares have four sides. Circles have one side. Something cannot be and not be simultaneously.)

El Barto · 03-10-2006, 11:14 PM

Quote:

He can make a square circle and an octangular sphere if he wants.

How?

**Dr. Horrible** · 03-11-2006, 12:23 PM

[double post]

**Dr. Horrible** · 03-11-2006, 12:24 PM

Well, I suppose the simplest way would be to create a new language in which square means circle, but that's just being cheeky.

Anyway, if word games and inherent paradoxes that arise from infinities are all that keep you from a meainingful relationship with God, it's best not to think about it. That's not to say one shouldn't question one's faith (or lack of faith), but to get hung up on something so trivial would be tragic. I don't care if God can make a rock that he both can and can't lift, and I don't think it's something he would spend a lot of time worrying about either.

**Prince Toad** · 03-11-2006, 01:01 PM

The point isn't whether God can reconcile a paradox within itself. The point is that there are things that not even an all-powerful being can do, which kind of throws a monkey wrench into most monotheistic theology.

Er, the point is that in a different language, squares would still have four sides and circles would have one. There can't be something that is the concept of square which is simultaneously the concept of circle, whether those are the words used for the concept or not.

Anyway, that's not what's "keeping me from a meaningful relationship with God." What's "keeping me" is the fact that most parts of organized religion make no sense. As I said, I'm agnostic-- you can't prove there is a God, but you can't really prove there isn't, either. And I'm pretty sure I'd subscribe to the good old "Great Watchmaker" theory, if I thought there was a God. He just made the universe and that was it. (But I see no reason why the universe couldn't have just always been there. Of course, this gets into complex ideas about the nature of time about which I am utterly clueless.) Plus, I'd rather live by my own morals than someone else's. And all the persecution doesn't help, although (some of) that's in the past. (I'm Jewish on both sides, if you'll recall.)

Alph · 03-11-2006, 09:08 PM

I don't think logic exists. Without language, or a concept thereof, you wouldn't have logical fallacies. You would just have things the way they are and that would be that.

***CaptHayfever*** · 03-12-2006, 01:19 PM

^But that's what logic is based on: The way things are.
Also, the only way to have no concept of language is to have no organisms that communicate.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

**Prince Toad** · 03-12-2006, 06:23 PM

What? Without language, something still can't be and not be simultaneously, we just wouldn't have words to describe that fact. Logic and language don't have much to do with each other. Saying logic doesn't exist is... wrong.

Koga · 03-13-2006, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptHayfever

^But that's what logic is based on: The way things are.
Also, the only way to have no concept of language is to have no organisms that communicate.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

Language is inherently human and very different from the way animals communicate. The world has been without language for billions of years. As PT pointed out that is not related to logic, though.

Darth_Flava · 03-13-2006, 11:00 PM

Why question God's ways. Regardless what is said on this thread doesn't change and shouldn't change any kind of relationship anybody has with God. It's almost as if you all are trying to find a loop hole in God and exploit. It isn't going to work. You can use all the human logic you want and would never even be close to explaining God. As for those who call themselves agnostic, I suggest just finding out what side you truly believe. I don't believe the whole "I'm neutral" thing because you just say that because fear is keeping you from actually coming out and saying that you are religious or atheist.

**Kargath** · 03-13-2006, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alph

I don't think logic exists. Without language, or a concept thereof, you wouldn't have logical fallacies. You would just have things the way they are and that would be that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_logic

Logic has its OWN language. I know, it got banged into my head for six months straight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth_Flava

Why question God's ways. Regardless what is said on this thread doesn't change and shouldn't change any kind of relationship anybody has with God. It's almost as if you all are trying to find a loop hole in God and exploit. It isn't going to work. You can use all the human logic you want and would never even be close to explaining God. As for those who call themselves agnostic, I suggest just finding out what side you truly believe. I don't believe the whole "I'm neutral" thing because you just say that because fear is keeping you from actually coming out and saying that you are religious or atheist.

Erm, no. I'm not agnostic because of fear, I'm agnostic because after analysis and reduction the evidence isn't ironclad conclusive either way.

**Kargath** · 03-14-2006, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptHayfever

Omnipotence is infinite power. Limitless. Boundless. Unmeasurable.
Infinity is not a number; it's a description, a concept. You can't use it like a number; there's no such thing as infinity plus one. Nothing can be more infinite than infinity.
Your question is a fallacy, not a paradox.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[ October 03, 2005, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: CaptHayfever ]

Actually, set theory shows that infinity comes in different sizes, and also that you can have a set larger than the set of all sets.
Correspondingly, a lot of people hate set theory (myself included).

***CaptHayfever*** · 03-15-2006, 12:53 AM

However, the question still asks for infinity plus one, which is still a fallacy.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

***ZeldaGirl*** · 03-15-2006, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth_Flava

As for those who call themselves agnostic, I suggest just finding out what side you truly believe. I don't believe the whole "I'm neutral" thing because you just say that because fear is keeping you from actually coming out and saying that you are religious or atheist.

I wouldn't say I'm afraid of anything. I would say that with so many different religions and beliefs, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to determine the truth. I can believe in a greater being, but only to the certain extent of believing in its existence skeptically, because I have no prove it exists. I've experienced times where I truly believe a God exists; and there have been moments when where I truly believe he does not. Its a simple matter of indecision - because I am too small minded to be able to know for sure.

Lurch1982 · 03-15-2006, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth_Flava

Why question God's ways. Regardless what is said on this thread doesn't change and shouldn't change any kind of relationship anybody has with God. It's almost as if you all are trying to find a loop hole in God and exploit. It isn't going to work. You can use all the human logic you want and would never even be close to explaining God. As for those who call themselves agnostic, I suggest just finding out what side you truly believe. I don't believe the whole "I'm neutral" thing because you just say that because fear is keeping you from actually coming out and saying that you are religious or atheist.

Quote:

Only Sith believe in Absolutes

OMG PWND BY STAR WARS III.

Actually, you can conceptualize infinity plus 1 or infinity added to another infinity. It basically goes down to a basic formula, stating "God's power = x," but it can't be supreme because x inherantly can be outdone by "exceeding God's power = x+1." Granted, lots of people who defend god like to discount insanely valid things, like evolution and the fossil record, so I'm not really expecting them to concede that point.

**Dr. Horrible** · 03-15-2006, 12:19 PM

Isn't "only the Sith believe in absolutes" an absolute?

Ignoring the fact that you pick on Christian fundamentalists to strenghten your argument, what would it even mean to be a little more powerful than a God, who can make anything he wants happen as if reality was his lucid dream? Adding constants is all well and good for math, but what could it possbly mean to be able to do anything, and then one more thing?

Lurch1982 · 03-15-2006, 02:23 PM

Sith comment is simply how seriously one should take people who say to choose a side (meaning not at all).

If something is more powerful than God (who is supposed to be all perfect, omnipotent, omniscient), it presents a major paradox to the concept of that diety.

**Dr. Horrible** · 03-15-2006, 06:00 PM

I wasn't asking what the implications would be. I was asking how something can be a little more powerful than all powerful.

As I said before, though, if there is a real, tangible God I really doubt he worries about being caught up in a paradox our concept of him might bring up.

03-10-2006, 08:32 PM	#43
Prince Toad PC Mod Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Rookery Gender: Posts: 11,402 Thanks: 43 Thanked 56 Times in 47 Posts Points: 43,222.57 Bank: 18,304.68 Total Points: 61,527.25 Donate	Grah. None of this makes sense. Part of the reason I can't accept organized religion. I could deal with a God that has no physical limits, but has logical limits-- sure, he can lift anything, but he can't make a rock he can't lift, explicitly because he can lift anything. He could create the world, and maybe things like constants in most chemical and mathematical equations (there's no hard logic behind Avogadro's number, that's just how it is), but not the laws of logic. It is not possible for something to be and not be. That doesn't jive with my view of how anything can be, divine or otherwise. Is that because God said so? No-- in none of an infinity of universes is it possible for something to be and not be. And anyway, where do these ideas come from? Who decided God could make a square circle? (Also impossible. Squares have four sides. Circles have one side. Something cannot be and not be simultaneously.) Last edited by Prince Toad; 05-05-2006 at 12:09 AM.

03-10-2006, 02:32 PM	#41
Dr. Horrible PP&R Mod Current Events Mod Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: More important than where is when.... Gender: Posts: 6,336 Thanks: 104 Thanked 293 Times in 177 Posts Points: 2,295.51 Bank: 1,865,934.44 Total Points: 1,868,229.95 Donate	The entire argument is a word game. "Can an all powerful being do what cannot be done? If so, then it is not something that cannot be done and he is not all powerful. Aren't I clever?" Either the term "all powerful" is meaningless because to be there are requirements to being considered all powerful, or it is not meaningless and an all powerful thing can do what does not make sense.

03-10-2006, 06:41 PM	#42
Princess Zelda of Hyrule Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Hyrule Castle Gender: Posts: 6,128 Thanks: 35 Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts Points: 6,484.36 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 6,984.36 Donate	It's useless applying logic to the God who invented logic.

03-11-2006, 12:23 PM	#45
Dr. Horrible PP&R Mod Current Events Mod Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: More important than where is when.... Gender: Posts: 6,336 Thanks: 104 Thanked 293 Times in 177 Posts Points: 2,295.51 Bank: 1,865,934.44 Total Points: 1,868,229.95 Donate	[double post]

03-11-2006, 12:24 PM	#46
Dr. Horrible PP&R Mod Current Events Mod Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: More important than where is when.... Gender: Posts: 6,336 Thanks: 104 Thanked 293 Times in 177 Posts Points: 2,295.51 Bank: 1,865,934.44 Total Points: 1,868,229.95 Donate	Well, I suppose the simplest way would be to create a new language in which square means circle, but that's just being cheeky. Anyway, if word games and inherent paradoxes that arise from infinities are all that keep you from a meainingful relationship with God, it's best not to think about it. That's not to say one shouldn't question one's faith (or lack of faith), but to get hung up on something so trivial would be tragic. I don't care if God can make a rock that he both can and can't lift, and I don't think it's something he would spend a lot of time worrying about either.

03-11-2006, 01:01 PM	#47
Prince Toad PC Mod Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Rookery Gender: Posts: 11,402 Thanks: 43 Thanked 56 Times in 47 Posts Points: 43,222.57 Bank: 18,304.68 Total Points: 61,527.25 Donate	The point isn't whether God can reconcile a paradox within itself. The point is that there are things that not even an all-powerful being can do, which kind of throws a monkey wrench into most monotheistic theology. Er, the point is that in a different language, squares would still have four sides and circles would have one. There can't be something that is the concept of square which is simultaneously the concept of circle, whether those are the words used for the concept or not. Anyway, that's not what's "keeping me from a meaningful relationship with God." What's "keeping me" is the fact that most parts of organized religion make no sense. As I said, I'm agnostic-- you can't prove there is a God, but you can't really prove there isn't, either. And I'm pretty sure I'd subscribe to the good old "Great Watchmaker" theory, if I thought there was a God. He just made the universe and that was it. (But I see no reason why the universe couldn't have just always been there. Of course, this gets into complex ideas about the nature of time about which I am utterly clueless.) Plus, I'd rather live by my own morals than someone else's. And all the persecution doesn't help, although (some of) that's in the past. (I'm Jewish on both sides, if you'll recall.)

03-11-2006, 09:08 PM	#48
Alph Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: MWAHAHAHHAHAHAAAA!!!ha. Gender: Posts: 1,294 Thanks: 21 Thanked 8 Times in 4 Posts Points: 12,868.64 Bank: 729.69 Total Points: 13,598.33 Donate	I don't think logic exists. Without language, or a concept thereof, you wouldn't have logical fallacies. You would just have things the way they are and that would be that.

03-12-2006, 01:19 PM	#49
*CaptHayfever* Smash Supermod Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: (n) - the place where I am Gender: Posts: 19,273 Thanks: 160 Thanked 733 Times in 474 Posts Points: 105,385.73 Bank: 923.79 Total Points: 106,309.52 Donate	^But that's what logic is based on: The way things are. Also, the only way to have no concept of language is to have no organisms that communicate. And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

03-12-2006, 06:23 PM	#50
Prince Toad PC Mod Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Rookery Gender: Posts: 11,402 Thanks: 43 Thanked 56 Times in 47 Posts Points: 43,222.57 Bank: 18,304.68 Total Points: 61,527.25 Donate	What? Without language, something still can't be and not be simultaneously, we just wouldn't have words to describe that fact. Logic and language don't have much to do with each other. Saying logic doesn't exist is... wrong.

03-13-2006, 11:00 PM	#52
Darth_Flava Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: North Carolina Posts: 95 Thanks: 0 Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts Points: 3,889.92 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 4,389.92 Donate	Why question God's ways. Regardless what is said on this thread doesn't change and shouldn't change any kind of relationship anybody has with God. It's almost as if you all are trying to find a loop hole in God and exploit. It isn't going to work. You can use all the human logic you want and would never even be close to explaining God. As for those who call themselves agnostic, I suggest just finding out what side you truly believe. I don't believe the whole "I'm neutral" thing because you just say that because fear is keeping you from actually coming out and saying that you are religious or atheist.

03-15-2006, 12:53 AM	#55
*CaptHayfever* Smash Supermod Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: (n) - the place where I am Gender: Posts: 19,273 Thanks: 160 Thanked 733 Times in 474 Posts Points: 105,385.73 Bank: 923.79 Total Points: 106,309.52 Donate	However, the question still asks for infinity plus one, which is still a fallacy. And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

03-15-2006, 12:19 PM	#58
Dr. Horrible PP&R Mod Current Events Mod Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: More important than where is when.... Gender: Posts: 6,336 Thanks: 104 Thanked 293 Times in 177 Posts Points: 2,295.51 Bank: 1,865,934.44 Total Points: 1,868,229.95 Donate	Isn't "only the Sith believe in absolutes" an absolute? Ignoring the fact that you pick on Christian fundamentalists to strenghten your argument, what would it even mean to be a little more powerful than a God, who can make anything he wants happen as if reality was his lucid dream? Adding constants is all well and good for math, but what could it possbly mean to be able to do anything, and then one more thing?

03-15-2006, 02:23 PM	#59
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Katrinaland, USA Gender: Posts: 9,113 Thanks: 119 Thanked 185 Times in 120 Posts Points: 25,155.94 Bank: 136,219.57 Total Points: 161,375.51 Donate	Sith comment is simply how seriously one should take people who say to choose a side (meaning not at all). If something is more powerful than God (who is supposed to be all perfect, omnipotent, omniscient), it presents a major paradox to the concept of that diety.

03-15-2006, 06:00 PM	#60
Dr. Horrible PP&R Mod Current Events Mod Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: More important than where is when.... Gender: Posts: 6,336 Thanks: 104 Thanked 293 Times in 177 Posts Points: 2,295.51 Bank: 1,865,934.44 Total Points: 1,868,229.95 Donate	I wasn't asking what the implications would be. I was asking how something can be a little more powerful than all powerful. As I said before, though, if there is a real, tangible God I really doubt he worries about being caught up in a paradox our concept of him might bring up.