73 replies to this topic

[Genrail]

Can God microwave a burrito so hot even he him could not eat it???


Omnipotence, is what i am getting at here.

[Chyros]

The same reasoning was once applied to the concepts of God, omnipotence, and the existence of evil. If God is omnipotent and good, why is there evil? If he doesn't want to, he's evil; if he can't, he's not omnipotent, etc.

And the occasional "can god make a brick so heavy even he can't lift it", yeah.

[RaiDK]

God doesn't eat, nor does he need to.

There.

[Genrail]

but then you come to this topic,

The question. + big wall o' text

[Ghostrider]

Jesus was God in the form of man, so he could eat a scalding hot burrito, but he'd suffer all the same burns as a normal man.

[Alias]

Your main problem here is you are classifying omnipotence as a 'must' of being God/a god. A deity does not need omnipotence to be God.

Cue deism.

[CJ]

Alias, on 10 Jun 2010, 15:59, said:

Your main problem here is you are classifying omnipotence as a 'must' of being God/a god. A deity does not need omnipotence to be God.

Cue deism.

Well aren't religions pretending that God is omnipotent anyways?

[Alias]

Just because it is assumed does not mean it is true.

Take a cooked steak for example. You may assume that it is hot, as it has recently been cooked, but heat is not a prerequisite of a steak. It is possible to have a steak that is both cooked and cold. The fact that the steak is cold does not disprove the fact it is cooked, so to say.

What I'm getting at here is you cannot disprove something just by disproving assumptions related to it.

[CJ]

Religions are the words of God aren't they? And in Islam for instance it is clearly stated that God is omnipotent, therefore, combined with the rest of this discussion, it just proves that Islam can't be right.

[Alias]

That's not what this is about though, this thread is about disproving the concept of God by attempting to disprove omnipotence. Even if omnipotence is disproved it still leads to the fact that it is not a prerequisite for a deity.

[CJ]

Well, you're trying to disprove the concept of a god, while 'God' in the thread's title is capitalized, which means it's supposed to be about the god that is represented in the Bible, Torah and Koran... And in that case he said himself that he is omnipotent in the Koran...

[Shirou]

Trying to disprove the concept of a god by casting doubt on the concept of omnipotence through such scenario's...

Well yeah thats nice and all but why would you interprete omnipotence as breaking through Gods own limitations. If he really is omnipotent he has no limitations, and the simple answer would be the burrito would get infinitely hot and God could still infinitely eat it. The ''so hot that even he can't eat it'' is a limitation set by your mind. However the limit would actually lie in physics, the threshold at which the burrito Xplodes with the sp33d of light or something.

Edited by Trivmvirate, 10 June 2010 - 17:24.

[Chyros]

Alias, on 10 Jun 2010, 16:59, said:

Your main problem here is you are classifying omnipotence as a 'must' of being God/a god. A deity does not need omnipotence to be God.

According to the Bible, God is both omnipotent and not omnipotent .

[Shirou]

The Bible is written by different people with different viewpoints on omnipotence.

A trained theologist would easily dismiss any argument so far used in this topic.

[TehKiller]

ThatDR, on 10 Jun 2010, 16:32, said:

Religions are the words of God aren't they? And in Islam for instance it is clearly stated that God is omnipotent, therefore, combined with the rest of this discussion, it just proves that Islam can't be right.

No. Why? Because your definition of "religion" is wrong. There is no word of the God. Period. And this is coming from a religious person.

Holy books were never written by God nor were the words in them spoken by God. Human made metaphores ARE NOT literal commands of God. The only text I can think of that "might" have been the literal words of God would be the 10 Commandments. That being said God may be omnipotent but isnt required to be.


And now let me counter the "Uber" question: "Why would God create something like that in the first place?"

[CJ]

TehDR, on 10 Jun 2010, 18:46, said:

ThatDR, on 10 Jun 2010, 16:32, said:

Religions are the words of God aren't they? And in Islam for instance it is clearly stated that God is omnipotent, therefore, combined with the rest of this discussion, it just proves that Islam can't be right.

No. Why? Because your definition of "religion" is wrong. There is no word of the God. Period. And this is coming from a religious person.

Holy books were never written by God nor were the words in them spoken by God. Human made metaphores ARE NOT literal commands of God. The only text I can think of that "might" have been the literal words of God would be the 10 Commandments. That being said God may be omnipotent but isnt required to be.


And now let me counter the "Uber" question: "Why would God create something like that in the first place?"

I have a little question : Did you ever read the Koran? Did you even hear about it? I took the islam as an example because it's clearly stated in the first soura (verse) of it that the words are actually from God himself, brought by the Archangel Gabriel. And all the Koran IS (supposedly, since I don't believe in it) the literal words of God.
I'm sure you'd get a confirmation of that if you ask any Imam who knows how his job...

[TehKiller]

Alright I wasnt aware of the belief in Qu'ran but doesnt change the fact that its written by a human being. Still holds your terminology of religion as innacurate.

[BeefJeRKy]

Anyone who follows what is written in the books literally is misusing the most important gift (be it of divine origin or not) to human beings and that is one's intellect. I believe that an omnipotent God is not exactly viable. Having said that I follow a very malleable deism philosphy.

[CodeCat]

Which gods is this about anyway? I know for a fact that the gods of Germanic lore were not omnipotent, and in fact were destined to die at Ragnarök.

[Libains]

I wouldn't imagine this is NOT about corporeal Gods, they by definition can't be omnipotent (although those ones that copped it at Ragnarok were epic win)

Edited by AJ, 10 June 2010 - 23:07.

[Genrail]

OK... Because every-one is killing each other over "Gods" it is.

Ill make it my own make-believe god. Who IS omnipotent.

Would the question still be possible?

[Alias]

Dr. Genrail, on 11 Jun 2010, 9:07, said:

OK... Because every-one is killing each other over "Gods" it is.

Ill make it my own make-believe god. Who IS omnipotent.

Would the question still be possible?

Very well, in this case RaiDK's point stands. If God is infinitely powerful and makes an infinitely hot burrito then by the definition of omnipotence God will also have infinitely strong tastebuds and infinite heat resistance.

To answer the question, yes, God can make an infinitely hot burrito. That does not mean it is impossible for God to eat it.

This all leans on the fact that an omnipotent God needs food in the first place, which by the definition would not.

[NergiZed]

Mildly on topic:
Has there been any instance in any religious scripture that involved time manipulation? Because that's a very recent concept and was probably beyond the imagination of the people from way back when. If God can't manipulate the arrow of time, than God isn't omnipotent.

[Golan]

Why would she require manipulation? Her ineffable plan has to include the very essence of the space-time-fabric, so it's all the way She wants it to be anyways.

Also, your concept of time is flawed. With an extremely high probability, there is no such thing as an "arrow of time". At least not a single, straight, non-11-dimensional one.

Edited by Golan, 28 July 2010 - 10:29.

[NergiZed]

Yes, time manipulation. I just want to see if there are any examples.

I'm using the term 'arrow of time' in a non-scientific sense meaning the direction of time.