- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
We are all dying, but all the while we are we are living. If one does not believe in an afterlife then they may see worshiping or practicing a religion as a waste of their short yet precious time on Earth. We are allowed to spend our lives how we want to, and even Christians have to admit that because of Free Will.
"If the rock is made of a ridiculously dense substance, made by God, the rock cannot be greater than God or God would not be omnipotent and would be a thing which is not God. God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent eternally. There cannot be anything bigger than God. There cannot be anything more knowledgeable than God (including you). There cannot be anything that is everywhere as God is omnipresent."
Starting off I never claimed that I am more knowledgeable than God, and this is not an attack on your religion. If anything this is a thought experiment. According to the Bible, you are correct, but this statement proves God could not do the impossible unless you use the argument "Humans can't understand it." which I think is a fairly valid argument as we still do not understand a lot.
"Your question is absurd, the thing you are trying to prove is not God indeed is not God. God is the creator of all things. Your statements and questions here are void of reason other than that you do not want God to rule over you."
I have stated that it is simply a thought experiment through which you can determine that an omnipotent being who can do the impossible is impossible at least through our current understanding of logic. This again is not an attack on your beliefs/religion.
This is my last post as I have outlined all of my arguments. Thanks for debating.
It is absurd to say that in order prove He is omnipotent, God must be able to do something proving He is not omnipotent.
This will most likely be my last post as I have said the same thing multiple times and still do not understand what it is you are missing or I am missing. The statement itself doesn't exactly make it so an omnipotent being is impossible, just not in the way that most people would think. If you were omnipotent you would be all powerful, which would mean that, at least in my understanding, you could do anything, even if it is contradictory. In my honest opinion the simplest answer for the side of "Yes" is to say that God is able to do everything, including things that are contradictory and still be omnipotent, but the means of such a feat are not understandable to humankind.
The idea the words represent is God making something that He cannot overcome. It's an impossibility and the goal of this statement, at least in my mind, is to prove that an omnipotent being cannot do absolutely everything anyone has thought of unless they have the ability to alter logic (which they very well may have considering they would be all powerful).
The hypothetical rock could be infinitely dense, so in this case size wouldn't matter. The rock would have to be so heavy that God cannot lift it, or if that is not possible, then God wouldn't be omnipotent. It is simply impossible and by presenting this problem some atheists believe that an omnipotent God who can do everything imaginable is not possible.
I'm sorry but that's simply not the question I'm asking. I think NowASaint puts it quite well; "the explanation of jumping into a mortal body does not work because if God is limited to a mortal body, He is not God....and so you would be left with your absurdity of God creating a rock so big He cannot lift it." although it would not be a rock so big He cannot lift it, but a rock so heavy.
(of a deity) having unlimited power; able to do anything.
To me the definition of omnipotent; "able to do anything" would mean that the omnipotent being could do anything conceivable, though I suppose the definition is up to interpretation.
The paradox does not go into detail about how the lifting of the rock would work. It is just assumed that if an omnipotent being were to create a rock they cannot lift then they would account for all of the factors in order to make a rock they cannot lift. If they are truly all powerful they could manipulate gravity so that they could make a rock they cannot lift.
We're talking about the abilities of an omnipotent being, so the argument about Earth makes no sense. The lifting of the rock could happen on any plane with the same laws of weight (gravity). The question itself is if an omnipotent being could make a rock that they could not lift. The place is irrelevant to the question and your argument is flawed either way as Jupiter is heavier than Earth meaning that it could take place on a planet larger than Earth. The two rocks could be stacked to use as a place to lift the one of the rocks from.
You can be omnipotent and still go into a simulation. Your physical might never changes, but your simulated might does. You are never not omnipotent in the example.
It's true that you could change your own strength as an omnipotent being, but the question is could an omnipotent being with all of their might available to them create a rock that with all of their might available to them they cannot lift.
I still am apparently not clear enough with my wording. I presented the question unspecifically not going into too much detail. The real question would then be Could God, the omnipotent being He is, create a rock that he, as an omnipotent being and with all of His strength (not downgrading His strength so that He cannot lift the rock) create a rock that could not be lifted with His omnipotent strength? This then leads to the two problems presented with both answers while still considering God (or any omnipotent being) to be omnipotent.