Gotta love paradoxes.
This one is my favorite (reworded)
I will prove that god is not omnipotent.
Here we go. First, definition of omnipotent: All powerful; Able to do anything. Let’s give god a task: make a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it. Paradox. If he can make a rock he cannot lift, there is something he cannot do: lift the rock. Therefore, he is not “able to do anything”. If he cannot create a rock he cannot lift,there is one thing he cannot do: create the rock.
There is no situation that preserves his omnipotence.
Conclusion? God, if he exists, is not omnipotent.
But wait, there is more. God is being defined as: A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe.
Therefore, by logic, there cannot be a god.
Now, don’t get me wrong, this is not REAL proof that there is no god, just a fun paradox.
This open post was written 1 year, 8 months ago | V/U/S: 370, 30, 4 | Edit Post | Leave a reply | Report Post
Reciprocity (0)
Since writing this post =Adam= may have helped people, but has not within the last 4 days. =Adam= is a verified member, has been around for 2 years, 5 months and has 65 posts and 3,249 replies to their name.
Post Tags (10)
Replies (30)
Where were you?
You can also watch events on Help.com as they happen
=Adam= edited this post 1 year, 8 months ago. Read the previous text »
Gotta love paradoxes.
This one is my favorite (reworded)
I will prove that god is not omnipotent.
Here we go. First, definition of omnipotent: All powerful; Able to do anything. Let’s give god a task: make a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it. Paradox. Of he can make a rock he cannot lift, there is something he cannot do: lift the rock. Therefore, he is not “able to do anything”. If he cannot create a rock he cannot lift,there is one thing he cannot do: create the rock.
There is no situation that preserves his omnipotence.
Conclusion? God, if he exists, is not omnipotent.
But wait, there is more. God is being defined as: A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe.
Therefore, by logic, there cannot be a god.
Now, don’t get me wrong, this is not REAL proof that there is no god, just a fun paradox.
=Adam= edited this post 1 year, 8 months ago. Read the previous text »
Gotta love paradoxes.
This one is my favorite (reworded)
I will prove that god is not omnipotent.
Here we go. First, definition of omnipotent: All powerful; Able to do anything. Let’s give god a task: make a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it. Paradox. If he can make a rock he cannot lift, there is something he cannot do: lift the rock. Therefore, he is not “able to do anything”. If he cannot create a rock he cannot lift,there is one thing he cannot do: create the rock.
There is no situation that preserves his omnipotence.
Conclusion? God, if he exists, is not omnipotent.
But wait, there is more. God is being defined as: A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe.
Therefore, by logic, there cannot be a god.
Now, don’t get me wrong, this is not REAL proof that there is no god, just a fun paradox.
=Adam= invited 20 users to read this post 1 year, 8 months ago.
Hmmm. This is a brain teaser. My first thought is, that “god” is in everything and is the rock, the weight, all the illusions that we perceive, anyway. I believe the illusions are real, too, but they are illusions. This is a human perception, and requirement of God, to prove. What is “god” in my belief is both simple and complex at the same time, therefore, very easy to understand and yet beyond our perceptions of our physical laws. God is Logic. Too logical to fall for such a trap, or need to give proof.
very interesting and a good point to make people think i suppose.
It comes down to, however, whether or not he can create such a rock. One must agree that he is not completely omnipotent under our physical laws.
What if he could both lift, and not lift the rock? He can do ANYTHING right? Why not bend reality, so that he could, and at the same time could not lift the rock?
An Undisclosed Location | 1 year, 8 months ago (2 hours, 47 minutes after post)
adam, it very, very, much depends on the definition of god
there COULD, (in the sense that this specific thing does not disprove it), but only if he is not omniepotent, in an “unintellangent designer” sense. In other words, The Flying Spaghetti Monster!
Nightowl wrote:
What if he could both lift, and not lift the rock? He can do ANYTHING right? Why not bend reality, so that he could, and at the same time could not lift the rock?
Poor Shrödinger’s cat, being dead and alive at the same time.
An Undisclosed Location | 1 year, 8 months ago (4 hours, 37 minutes after post)
so jesus is a super zombie? And he was really a german kitty?
the bible makes alot more sense now!
mou = god wrote:
Nightowl wrote:
What if he could both lift, and not lift the rock? He can do ANYTHING right? Why not bend reality, so that he could, and at the same time could not lift the rock?Poor Shrödinger’s cat, being dead and alive at the same time.
You must use the google, young grasshopper.
An Undisclosed Location | 1 year, 8 months ago (4 hours, 41 minutes after post)
mou = god wrote:
You must use the google, young grasshopper.
why do that when i can bullshit people into thinking I know what I talk about?
and im a beautiful butterfly
Nightowl wrote:
What if he could both lift, and not lift the rock? He can do ANYTHING right? Why not bend reality, so that he could, and at the same time could not lift the rock?
I do see where you are going. However, would this mean he could do anything, or that there are now TWO things he cannot do? Who’s to say that doing so would make him fully omnipotent rather than detracting from his omnipotence?
And mou, I JUST read about the cat 2 days ago. The poison in the bottle, right? Mind blowing.
Adamlongname wrote:
Nightowl wrote:
What if he could both lift, and not lift the rock? He can do ANYTHING right? Why not bend reality, so that he could, and at the same time could not lift the rock?I do see where you are going. However, would this mean he could do anything, or that there are now TWO things he cannot do? Who’s to say that doing so would make him fully omnipotent rather than detracting from his omnipotence?
And mou, I JUST read about the cat 2 days ago. The poison in the bottle, right? Mind blowing.
wait,….what cat? I can have link plz?
Adamlongname wrote:
And mou, I JUST read about the cat 2 days ago. The poison in the bottle, right? Mind blowing.
Yup, ’tis.
i suppose “god” transcends logic. i’d assume you’d have that power if you were omnipotent, wouldn’t you?
:]
So, in essence, he can’t create a world that uses current logic in which he is omnipotent.
Therefore, he is not omnipotent.
case and point.
Adamlongname wrote:
So, in essence, he can’t create a world that uses current logic in which he is omnipotent.Therefore, he is not omnipotent.
case and point.
no he can create a world that uses logic. but HE doesn’t have to abide by logic. only us. anything beyond that, and we would never be able to understand it. it seems quite simple. to me god is whatever transcends logic.
However, the rock, a component of the world, would have to abide by logic as it IS a part of the world. Either the rock is lifted or not. If you are staring at the rock, you won’t say “hmm, It was lifted and not lifted at the same time.” No. It would have to abide by logic to be seen, and that means it going either way.
That was actually the one I visited that sparked this post, commander.
Small internet, eh?
Adamlongname wrote:
That was actually the one I visited that sparked this post, commander.Small internet, eh?
did you use stumbleupon to find it like i did?
and adam, get a real picture of yourself up, submit to peer pressure
Dude! Stumbleupon is my social network of choice! Rock on!
And, I know, I just have to get a camera set up. Also, I am waiting for a day when I don’t look like a drug addict. (I always have deep, dark circles under my eyes, except on rare occasions)
Adamlongname wrote:
Dude! Stumbleupon is my social network of choice! Rock on!And, I know, I just have to get a camera set up. Also, I am waiting for a day when I don’t look like a drug addict. (I always have deep, dark circles under my eyes, except on rare occasions)
drug addicts are fun!
post an old picture if necessary
Er, I think I have one from the fifth grade somewhere… :P
I don’t take many pictures. Could that be why I have such a low sense of self?
Adamlongname wrote:
Er, I think I have one from the fifth grade somewhere… :PI don’t take many pictures. Could that be why I have such a low sense of self?
or maybe you get bugged by the flash, I wouldn’t know.
Don’t you have a school picture to add?
Adam the burninator wrote:
However, the rock, a component of the world, would have to abide by logic as it IS a part of the world. Either the rock is lifted or not. If you are staring at the rock, you won’t say “hmm, It was lifted and not lifted at the same time.” No. It would have to abide by logic to be seen, and that means it going either way.
maybe the rock has to obey the logic of this world, but the action of “god” doesn’t. for example, catholics believe god can change the existence of an object without us ever noticing it. for example, the bread becoming “jesus’ flesh”. though it becomes flesh, it retains the characteristics of bread. if you want to believe that, i don’t see why it could not happen, since and omnipotent power can do anything.
so perhaps god really is both lifting and not lifting the rock. we just wouldn’t know it because our brains can’t comprehend it.
Invite Others to Help
A logged in and verified Help.com member has the ability to setup a Friends List and invite others to help with posts.