Quantcast
The Abrahamic Religions make No Sense

Forums - General Discussion - The Abrahamic Religions make No Sense

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:

Your proof (which I don't think is correct anyway) misses the point of that question. The point is 'Can an omnipotent being place a limit on its own power?'


Possibly. However, that omnipotent being can choose if it wants to control its power or not. 

My "Proof" was not a proof.

Its a representation that explains how God can control everything (If he chooses to)

The point is that if an omnipotent being can limit its own power then it loses omnipotence - if it can not limit its own power it never had omnipotence. As such omnipotence is paradoxical.



Around the Network
Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:

Possibly. However, that omnipotent being can choose if it wants to control its power or not. 

My "Proof" was not a proof.

Its a representation that explains how God can control everything (If he chooses to)

The point is that if an omnipotent being can limit its own power then it loses omnipotence - if it can not limit its own power it never had omnipotence. As such omnipotence is paradoxical.


It can but does it choose to?

The being then retains the title of omnipotence.



Yay!!!

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:

Possibly. However, that omnipotent being can choose if it wants to control its power or not. 

My "Proof" was not a proof.

Its a representation that explains how God can control everything (If he chooses to)

The point is that if an omnipotent being can limit its own power then it loses omnipotence - if it can not limit its own power it never had omnipotence. As such omnipotence is paradoxical.


It can but does it choose to?

The being then retains the title of omnipotence.


If omnipotence can be removed by a choice then it isn't omnipotence.



Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:

Possibly. However, that omnipotent being can choose if it wants to control its power or not. 

My "Proof" was not a proof.

Its a representation that explains how God can control everything (If he chooses to)

The point is that if an omnipotent being can limit its own power then it loses omnipotence - if it can not limit its own power it never had omnipotence. As such omnipotence is paradoxical.


It can but does it choose to?

The being then retains the title of omnipotence.


If omnipotence can be removed by a choice then it isn't omnipotence.

Why is it not? 

The omnipotent being has not chosen to set its path to limited power YET he has the power to do it. 



Yay!!!

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:


If omnipotence can be removed by a choice then it isn't omnipotence.

Why is it not? 

The omnipotent being has not chosen to set its path to limited power YET he has the power to do it. 


Can he set a limit on his power and then remove it? If so then he never set a limit on his power and so cannot do anything, if not then there was something he could not do. Either way he does not have omnipotence.



Around the Network
Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
 


If omnipotence can be removed by a choice then it isn't omnipotence.

Why is it not? 

The omnipotent being has not chosen to set its path to limited power YET he has the power to do it. 


Can he set a limit on his power and then remove it? If so then he never set a limit on his power and so cannot do anything, if not then there was something he could not do. Either way he does not have omnipotence.

This was an argument I stumbled on years ago. 

Simply put it to this. 

"Is God capable of being incapable?" If God is capable of being incapable, it means that He is incapable, because He has the potential to not be able to do something. Conversely, if God is incapable of being incapable, then the two inabilities cancel each other out, making God have the capability to do something.



Yay!!!

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
 


If omnipotence can be removed by a choice then it isn't omnipotence.

Why is it not? 

The omnipotent being has not chosen to set its path to limited power YET he has the power to do it. 


Can he set a limit on his power and then remove it? If so then he never set a limit on his power and so cannot do anything, if not then there was something he could not do. Either way he does not have omnipotence.

This was an argument I stumbled on years ago. 

Simply put it to this. 

"Is God capable of being incapable?" If God is capable of being incapable, it means that He is incapable, because He has the potential to not be able to do something. Conversely, if God is incapable of being incapable, then the two inabilities cancel each other out, making God have the capability to do something.

So what you're saying is that god does not have the capability to limit his own power?



Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Rath said:
 


If omnipotence can be removed by a choice then it isn't omnipotence.

Why is it not? 

The omnipotent being has not chosen to set its path to limited power YET he has the power to do it. 


Can he set a limit on his power and then remove it? If so then he never set a limit on his power and so cannot do anything, if not then there was something he could not do. Either way he does not have omnipotence.

This was an argument I stumbled on years ago. 

Simply put it to this. 

"Is God capable of being incapable?" If God is capable of being incapable, it means that He is incapable, because He has the potential to not be able to do something. Conversely, if God is incapable of being incapable, then the two inabilities cancel each other out, making God have the capability to do something.

So what you're saying is that god does not have the capability to limit his own power?


There are possible answers to that question but it would take me too long to answer that lol. 

I guess God's omnipotence is what you can make out of it. 

This argument ended the same way years ago aswell. 



Yay!!!

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
richardhutnik said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

But yeah, my morals still stands, as they are a part of who I have become. But that still has nothing to do with this thread.

Considering how veiled you have been with your intentions in regards to the purpose of this thread, it is getting to a place where anything posted in it will have nothing to do with this thread at all.  Apparently, it isn't about determinism, nor is it really about sin either (any discussion about whether sin is or is not, is going to have to discuss what one sins against), outside of the wish that there wasn't any.  You should really come out and say it is about your support for gay marriage, and be done with it.  It would be a lot simplier, and posts in it have a shot at having something to do with it.

Your ignorance makes me sick at this point. Try look at the contexts before making assumptions. Morals has nothing to do with sins and does not exclusively go through religious peoples' minds. This is a thread about religion, nothing else. Read the OP again if you are still confused about this thread's topic.

Ok, I got it.  The purpose of this thread is to set up an argument against religion, where you get to shell religion from a high distance with artillery barrages, because you want to deconvert people.  It is NOT about discussing any issues that connect with it that may validate or invalidate it, like whether determinism is valid or not, or whether or not ethics exists in regards to whether or not sin exists.  You just aren't comfortable with this at all.  You just want to monologue against religion, and everything associated with it, because you are on a crusade to deconvert people.  It is your agenda piece, with in the end, you have the desire to change minds on gay marriage, as your main goal.

In short, you really need to get a blog somewhere and don't allow people to post comments.  You show little interest or regard in discussing anything.  And reading your little post on foreknowledge = lack of free will, doesn't have anything to do with morals or ethics at all.  What I can conclude is you have an agenda to shell Abrahamic religions, using this forum.  You have made up your mind that it makes no sense, and nothing to you will change it.  Saying it makes no sense has nothing to do with whether or not it makes sense, but merely is a salvo shell being fired from a position you don't want to be challenged or attacked.

The thrust?  You have made up your mind, and are as narrow minded as religious folks.  Difference is that you really don't have anything to offer humanity in your narrowmindeness.  At least from religion I got a few bucks that helped me keep my car on the road.



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

There is your same problem again. He didn't know that it could happen; He knew exactly how it would happen. God doesn't go "Oh no, they didn't!" every time someone makes a decision. He has predicted them all.


Well, aside from the obvious flaws in your logic, I see that you keep saying there is a god, which mean you are not an athiest. And if you are, claiming that religion is folly, is just plain ignorant since athieism is, in fact, a religion per Websters dictionary. 

 

Anyway, more to the point of your OP, and your quoted post, God, as Christians believe him to be, does not "predict" anything, he knows it. Now, I'm a father of three, and as a parent, I understand how this works more than I ever did before I was a parent. You see, God gave us free will, the ability to think independantly, to make our own choices, we are not just another animal roaming this planet, this is why we as a species are so much more "evolved" than any other species on the planet. God knows what our choices and actions will be, but does not intervene because he gave us that free will. That free will is what allows us as humans to grow, to learn what we can and can't do. It is how each of us is able to "grow" as an indivual because every choice has consequences either good or bad, and it is by those consequences that we become a stronger, better person. Now, if I look at this as a parent, I see my oldest. I tell her to clean her toys up, I know that she won't, but because I want her to grow as a person I don't hold her hand and force her to clean up her toys. When she doesn't clean up her toys, she gets a punishment. After a while of doing this, she begins to learn that if she cleans up her toys, she won't get in trouble. If I held her hand and forced her to clean up the toys, she would never learn to do it herself, thus she would, in effect, be a drone. 



"with great power, comes great responsibility."