- 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
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
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).
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!