Unless I am mistaken this is the 5th? time I have apologized about this thread.
Sorry X 1000000
Chill out, I wasn’t looking for an apology. I was just giving some advice.
Let’s be fair. Not only is that argument new to him/her apparently, but there are an awful lot of believers who do believe that God is omnipotent in the sense the OP is referring to. I’ve talked to people who insist that God CAN square the circle, make 2+2=3, as well as make a rock he can’t lift, and lift it anyway.
You have to excuse us, we occasionally act like a school of hungry sharks when a softball is tossed at us. I think many of us had similar epiphanies around the age of 17. So no harm no foul and welcome to the Straight dope and try to enjoy your visit.
Jim
Actually, I’ve never understood why this isn’t a good argument.
She, people, can She make a rock so big . . .
Proof
Axiom: God is infinite and perfect.
- Assume God is male.
- By our Axiom, all of God’s parts must be infinite and perfect.
- Therefore, God’s penis must be infinite and perfect.
- Since an infinite penis cannot become any larger, God cannot get an erection.
- For God to be impotent would be an imperfection, which contradicts our assumption.
Ergo, God is female, Q.E.D.
Now go beg forgiveness from the Mighty Quim.
Of course God can make a rock even He can’t lift. And of course He can lift the un-liftable rock. And He can easily square a circle. This is God we’re talking about. All that needs to be done is to redefine things like “lift,” “rock,” and “circle.” This is entry level God stuff.
He can even exist while not existing (or not exist while existing, depending on your preference), He just doesn’t choose to (or does choose to, depending on your preference).
You are thinking physical, God is spiritual.
But why would God play your game to begin with, I’m betting He wouldn’t, much too intelligent. You will find God when you seriously look within.
The arguments against it that I’ve heard (but I am by no means an expert on logical arguments):
- Omnipotence does not mean the ability to perform logical impossibilities;
or - Of course God is able to create a stone to heavy for her to lift, and in a further display of omnipotence, she is even capable of lifting that stone!
It’s hard to argue against that second one.
mawrestler_one25, small bit of friendly advice… You seem willing to learn and this is a truly great place to do so, in a book learnin’ sense and for what ails ya in general ol’ life. Stick around, read LOTS, try to see from another’s point of view and do your best to elevate your discourse (IE: via the conventions of English, as that’s the medium used here) to that which you see happening around you. It will give you the appearance of weighted experience beyond your years and at least a level playing field within which to launch your arguments. Also, it’ll help you to be more of a well-rounded individual. And then you can share in return. Welcome to the Dope and may you have a happy stay here.
Did you really mean that mumbo-jumbo at the end or are you joking?
QFT.
I like the latter option the most, because of the jaw-dropping expression it puts on people’s faces. Seriously, there are many strong arguments against a belief in God, but this 'aint of them.
Is this the logic the faithful have to deal with? I’m sorry…I just laughed.
Re Lekatt
[Spock voice]
He means it, Jim!
[/Spock voice]
Mawrestler, try this: there’s a distinction between semantic conundrums and true logical proofs. The easy way to approach this point is with the related issue, “If God’s all powerful, can he make a four-sided triangle?” And of course the answer is either No, or “Yes, he can, by divine fiat classifying quadrilateral figures as ‘triangles.’” You have proven nothing about God or omnipotence, only that he cannot both do and not do something. If a triangle is by definition a three-sided figure, then a four-sided triangle, while easily constructed as a seemingly-sensible English phrase, is a different sort of impossibility from something that’s purely physically impossible in the absence of law-violating miracle. It translates to “can you, or God, or anyone else, make a four-sided three-sided figure?”
The “rock so heavy he can’t lift it” (or burrito so hot…) is a subtler species of the same sort of conundrum:
- Omnipotence means able to do anything.
- Able to do anything includes able to lift rocks of any weight.
- Able to do anything also includes able to create rocks too heavy to lift.
- But points 2 and 3 are incompossible – both cannot occur simultaneously.
- ???
- Profit!
The point is that “omnipotence” and “too heavy to lift” are constructs of your language use, definitions.
Actually, God is quite able to create a rock too heavy to lift, and yet to move it! 
Like this: He creates heavier and heavier rocks. He’s still able to lift them. Ultimately he creates a rock that contains over half the matter in the Universe at that point.
Something that massive will implode into a black hole, of course. But that shouldn’t bother Him; He will have means to manipulate black holes, even if we don’t.
But at that point, that rock-turned-into-black-hole is more massive than everything else put together. There is no way in which you or even He can move it, because there is nothing massive enough to leverage against, even potentially if everything else is brought together. And Newtonian gravity means that even causing it to do something anisotropically that would cause it to move, won’t work, because everything else is in some manner of orbit around (or en route to impact with) it. Try to move it, and everything else tags along-- from any reference frame within the Universe, it’s immobile.
But you can move everything else relative to it, by causing them to move one at a time. And if everything else is moving relative to it, that is identical to its moving relative to everything else taken as a unit.
Ergo: yes, he can do both things simultaneously: create something too heavy to move, and cause it to appear to move relative to everything else in the Universe.
I assume they’d say that God can snurkle giffle zowp, too.
I know where you are coming from.
step 1: collect underpants
step 2:
Step 3: profit
hehe
No doubt, and do it better than anyone else, too !
Okay, I’ve read the rest of the thread and feel bad for jumping in with this comment.
{Although I meant it at the time}
**
mawrestler_one25** if you actually care and are interested in learning about logic and the details of different arguments the SDMB is a good place to learn. Lot’s os smart educated and informed folks. You’ll learn a lot if you want to.
Damn straight! And He can not only do it better than anyone else, He can do it perfectly! 