Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The definition of GOD
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 312 (454049)
02-05-2008 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by PurpleYouko
02-04-2008 2:04 PM


handwaving --> omni everything and logic
Omniscient = Always knowing everything, past present future with absolute infalibility. i.e. can NEVER be wrong about even the minutest detail.
omipotent = Can do absolutely anything. NO LIMITS.
No limits, huh?
Wouldn't saying that because something is not logically possible then god can't do it be placing a limit on what god is capable of doing? Wouldn't "NO LIMITS" include to the ability to do that which is logically impossible?
If omnipotence is limited to only that which is logically possible, then that is something very very close to, but not quite, omnipotence.
Given that he KNOWS (omniscience) what I will be doing, does he have the power (omnipotence)to make me do something else?
If YES then that means that he may well be omnipotent but he cannot be simultaneously omniscient since he has now been demonstrably wrong about what I would be doing.
If NO then he cannot be omnipotent since I have just found something that he cannot do.
With absolute omnipotence, he would be able to both know what you will be doing and change it, while maintaining omniscience. If he can't do that, then he isn't really omnipotent.
ere is really no wiggle room in this conundrum if you stick to the rules of pure logic.
While it seems to show a fault in omni-stuffs, it could just as easily be showing a fault of logic.
Either way you look at it, omnipotence overturns omniscinece every time. In a nutshell, Omnipotence gives God the power to be wrong. If he can never be wrong then he is, by definition, not omnipotent since he is limited.
I too, think that omnipotence trumps omniscience. Isn't omniscience a subset of omnipotence anyways? All powers include the power to know everything (and nothing).
It's like the old adage. Can God make a boulder so big that he can't lift it? I know that is a bit cliche but nevertheless it is a valid point.
God can make a boulder that is simultaneously too big to lift and lift-able.
I guess my point is that it is futile to use logic on omnipotence. You starting by already putting a limit on omnipotence, which is defeating the whole puropse of it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-04-2008 2:04 PM PurpleYouko has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 312 (454052)
02-05-2008 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by PurpleYouko
02-05-2008 10:58 AM


Re: omni everything and logic
My only point here is that you can't use logic to determine what God is like since logic is our own tool and really has no power over the real world.
I wish I head read this before I wrote the previous post as this is the point I was making to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 10:58 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 11:11 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 312 (454061)
02-05-2008 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by PurpleYouko
02-05-2008 11:11 AM


Re: omni everything and logic
I guess I could have read it either way, but to me it seemed that you were saying that since omnipotence and omniscience cannot coexist logically, then god cannot have both of those abilities. But what you were really saying was that since omnipotence and omnicscience cannot coexist logically, then you can't use logic to determine the abilities of god.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 11:11 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 12:11 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 312 (454072)
02-05-2008 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by PurpleYouko
02-05-2008 12:11 PM


Re: omni everything and logic
Logically, by our definitions, God can't be wrong, even if he wanted to be.
And that is the dilemma. Either God is wrong or WE are.
If God does exist then it is way more likely that it is us and our logic that is wrong, don't you think?
For sure. What we "prove" about god has nothing to do with what god is actually about.
Logic is just the wrong tool for the job of proving or disproving anything related to God.
I've been down that road before...
I don't understand why its hard for people to accept that.
And another thing, if we DID prove that god existed, then that would undermine the whole faith thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 12:11 PM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 2:02 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 312 (454095)
02-05-2008 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by PurpleYouko
02-05-2008 2:02 PM


Re: omni everything and logic
A bigger problem, as I see it, would be that once you can prove God scientifically, then God becomes measurable and would therefore be subject to our science and all it rules and logic and stuff.
Talk about limiting God.
Proving he exists scientifically would do exactly that.
A bit self defeating if you ask me. <_<
But that is assuming that god is omnipotent. Ya know, he might not be

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 2:02 PM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by PurpleYouko, posted 02-05-2008 3:27 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 312 (454118)
02-05-2008 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by rulerofthisuniverse
02-05-2008 4:35 PM


I am not identifying an particular God, what my definition attempts to do, is define WHAT a supreme intelligence would ACTUALLY be, what definition of God would be scientifically acceptable, with out resorting to any given religious view.
Why does the supreme intellegence have to be omnipotent?
That is just a religious view from the idea of god being all-mighty.
But it is not a necessity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by rulerofthisuniverse, posted 02-05-2008 4:35 PM rulerofthisuniverse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by rulerofthisuniverse, posted 02-05-2008 7:04 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 312 (454124)
02-05-2008 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by rulerofthisuniverse
02-05-2008 5:06 PM


Well the fact that my definition of GOD is devoid of any religion
God being omnipotent is a religious belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by rulerofthisuniverse, posted 02-05-2008 5:06 PM rulerofthisuniverse has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 312 (454130)
02-05-2008 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by rulerofthisuniverse
02-05-2008 5:21 PM


All my definition does is take an all knowing and all powerful being, and concluding that well it's impossible to get anything better than an all knowing and all powerful being, therefore whatever that being is, it would be the ultimate possible being.
That god must be the ultimate possible being is a religious belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by rulerofthisuniverse, posted 02-05-2008 5:21 PM rulerofthisuniverse has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 312 (454226)
02-06-2008 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by rulerofthisuniverse
02-05-2008 7:04 PM


Content hidden - Poster suspended for 24 hours
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Content "hidden". Poster suspended for 24 hours for crankiness and profanity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by rulerofthisuniverse, posted 02-05-2008 7:04 PM rulerofthisuniverse has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024