Hello believers, I have a question for you

Hello believers, I have a question for you.

What i know about god is that he is ALL-powerful, his being covers all living and non living, he has a ,good` personality, and he loves humans. I want to question some of of these 'facts'. Not the existence or goodness of him, but his ableness.


Can god, an all poweful being, create something he cannot possibly, lets say, lift? (Trying to keep it simple with simple examples casue im on mobile and dont wanna think much about it) If he CAN create it, and CAN'T lift it, it means he is not all powerful. If he cant create it, same thing. If he can create it AND lift it, it means he failed to create someting he is unable to lift. This also means hes not all powerful.

I don't get how can god have infinite power over everything and have infinite values in his existence.

Can you explain or prove it?

Also, if god exists, free will does not. If free will exists, god does not. This is a simple fact.

God says...
Shalom delightful as_a_matter_of_fact Dumb_Cat_Poster meme You_get_what_you_pray_for application ho_ho_ho smurfs Varoom what_a_nightmare God_is_not_mocked astounding I'm_thrilled heal so_let_it_be_written you're_lucky absetively_posilutely fer_sure in_practice how_do_I_put_this thank_you_very_much LOL oh_oh Mom hello chill vermin figuratively so_he_sess Mission_Accomplished umm

>I didn't feel like doing literally any research so here I am

Go read Mere Christianity and the proofs of St. Aquinas before shitposting.

>Can god, an all poweful being, create something he cannot possibly, lets say, lift?
He is omnipotent, so yes.
Also, because He is omnipotent, he can then lift this newly-created object.

>Also, if god exists, free will does not. If free will exists, god does not. This is a simple fact.
God is omnipotent. If he wants us to have free will, He may simply cause it to exist, and then it will.

God may exist. Thats all we can say at this point.

You're asking if any amount of power can enable a paradox to happen.

The answer is no. Power only allows anything that requires power to happen; paradoxes are intellectual constructs intended to never happen regardless of the amount of power applied to them.

So while power can do all things, paradoxes are by definition non-things, and no amount of power can achieve them. For instance, no amount of power will ever cause God to not be Good.

As to your "can God make a burrito so hot He can't eat it" type of questions, they're really at their heart stupid questions and as C.S. Lewis pointed out, "nonsense is nonsense even if you add the word 'God' to it."

If you're not impressed by God's power to speak the universe into existence, you're not in touch with the amount of power that took.

That's all you can say, now, while you're yet alive.

That's not all anyone can say.

You could've just as easily conveyed the same point with "hey godfags can God make a rock so big he can't lift it?" All that fluff in your post just made it more annoying.
pretty much got it, even infinite power doesn't trump logical paradoxes

I also disagree with that last statement. The existence of a god doesn't make free will impossible, unless you believe in a god that specifically controls all our choices.

This may be unrelated but if you are a Christian this is my opening dialogue.
The Christian God was man-made and anybody who can't see that at this point I have trouble taking seriously.

1. We are selfish assholes so it only makes sense that we'd claim to be made in his image.
2. It also makes sense that we would say God's entire purpose was to create us so he could love us.
3. It's easy of humanity to say that this God would be an end all be all to wipe people clean of the horrible sins they committed in their lifetime--infinite and unconditional forgiveness for every human.
4. It also makes sense that God would create a land of perfection after death where those who follow him go, and hint at a place of eternal suffering. This structure provides a constant deterrent and a means of minimizing both one's fear of death, and their or a groups mourning of loss.

The list goes on. Deist non-christians try to dodge these parallels but usually end up tying knots in their logic.

A bush suddenly catching fire and speaking is just as impossible under the laws of physics as that burrito thing is under the laws of logic, and so according to you God couldn't've done it. But he explicitly DID do it.

If God was only capable of doing things that 'don't break the rules', He would be incapable of performing any miracles at all.

you assert that physical laws and logical laws are equal, they aren't
if phenomena occurs that can't be explained by our current understanding, it doesn't mean that illogical phenomena has occurred, it means that our ability to explain it is insufficient. if you were walking down the street and a tree grew a face and started talking to you, you couldn't say "oh, I guess the universe is broken", you would then have to accept that you were experiencing something that wasn't previously known or understood.
logical problems are different because we can be certain that we have all the information necessary to solve them, even if a god exists that can make plants and animals talk, he definitely cannot make 2+2 equal 5

You are niggest user, thats why you didnt get double trips. Think about it this way, IF such God would exist, so you think your mind could comprehend it? All Im saying is, using our "current model of physics" (which is probably primitive when it comes to the shitstorm that is an knfinite Universe) we just cant imagine a being that is able to create something it cannot lift while at the same time, lifting it. also lurk moar faggot, no spoonfed shit www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPZ-uWirIN4

Logic can not objectively prove or disprove statements about reality. Statements about things being "true" or "false" only hold within the bounds of the rules and axioms you've assumed to be true.

If God can do something that goes against the rules of common logic, then our rules of logic must not correspond to reality. It's the same principle as with physical laws.

>2+2
>+

Coming from a Christian background to what I suppose is atheism at this point, I have this to say: The Christian God, as he is known from the Bible, is one sick fuck. As a perfect being with unlimited power, He decided to fuck around with consciousness. Knowing full well what atrocities His creation would experience, he still created Adam, all so an ever shrinking percent of living humans would believe in Him until He decides it's time to sound the trumpets and send Jesus back in for round 3. Regardless of His existence, that is not a being I want to devote myself to.

These are all very good points and I love them, but just saying "it makes sense" may not be the most convincing argument to those not already on your side.

Replace it makes sense with "if I was creating a religion, I would say _____ because it caters to my human tendencies"

>posting a God question on /sci

please get banned.

I generally agree with all that, but there are certain things in reality that can be reduced to logic without axioms or information. OP's scenario is definitely an example of that. I could define it as "a being capable of wielding infinite force cannot make a rock large enough that he cannot move it"

does that mean you would consider a religions to be plausible if it went against human nature?

Furthermore, he created beings with no knowledge of good and evil and then punished them (and all their descendants!) for sinning. And yet, before eating the forbidden fruit and gaining the knowledge of good and evil, they couldn't possibly know that it was an evil act.
How was Eve to know that she should follow the word of God and ignore the words of the Serpent?

Such as any religion which teaches depriving oneself of pleasures, which would include Christianity.

Well, they weren't supposed to eat the fruit because God explicitly told them not to. If they hadn't given in to temptation then (at least for a while) there would have been no sin.

that's a totally valid point, different sects have different ideas about what was going on there.

And the Serpent told her to do so. She did not know, and could not possibly know without first eating the fruit, that disobeying God was evil and sinful but disobeying the serpent was acceptable.

SHITPOST

>proofs of St. Aquinas
Why would you actually suggest somebody go read a bunch of fallacious bullshit? All of his arguments are garbage

>God is the best
>to be the best you have to exist
>therefore god exists

similarly:
>superman can defeat badguys with heat vision
>to defeat badguys with heat vision you have to exist
>therefore superman exists

fuck off back to