Proof that logically God cannot be omnipotent..

a reply to: GemmyMcGemJew

Who has free will? What does free will have to do with the supposition: "" if God is all powerful than he cannot be all good, but if God is all good, then he cannot be all powerful."?

What if "God" is nether good nor evil, but just is? What if what "good and evil" are is completely dependent on one's personal outlook on what is good or evil for them?

True windword, you can't always be good and be all powerful, to a degree.

Another thought/theory.

God may not know who created him and to himself he "created something even he can't lift" and in doing so created every eventually in multiple universes/scenarios to find that being.

as he is the "beginning and end" something/someone maybe left in one universe that can do more than him.

Anyway, God has has to be both good and evil to create all things, he knows that even a whole universe will eventually fade, thus he made multiple to pass through.

The only boulder he can't move or shake is HIMSELF. to a degree.

When he knows everything except who created him then it pays to find out at any cost. especially when your the only being that has that amount of power.

a reply to: windword
Was picking up the quote that gods mind resides in all things conscious. That was my point (although I'm sure you knew that).

I too don't agree with the statement you have to be evil to be all powerful. Doesn't make sense to me either.

I suppose the good they are referring to is his teachings. He made it a grey area for many subjects but there is a clear division in certain morals. Maybe that is the good/evil to which the OP is referring to.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: GemmyMcGemJew
a reply to: chr0naut
Why would god create billions of inhabitable planets where life can't exist to worship him and provide him money. Saturn's rings do not have tax exemption.

Why would god create a planet that is 70% water, most of which would kill us if we drank it. If we are the chosen species (for whatever reason you choose to believe this) why would he make the planet in this way. Seems irrational to me.

One could easily reason that God doesn't need money, or our worship, or even our acknowledgement of His existence, because If He wanted those, He'd simply make it happen, and we would be helpless to resist His will.

Perhaps the reason He isn't amassing wealth, is the issue of where would He ever spend it? Do you imagine that there is some cosmic corner shop where God would go? I mean what would be the point of wealth to God? Similar reasoning can be applied to tax exemptions (I'd be interested to know who collects the tax on Saturn's rings, and, if taxation law is applicable, why?).

God has probably also created billions of inhabitable planets where life (some of it conscious and intelligent) exists, otherwise "it's an awful waste of space".

The Bible does say that there are several types of non-human, intelligent, conscious beings called angels. Why not other forms of intelligent life that are none of any human's business and therefore wouldn't be included in the Bible. There ARE verses in the Bible that hint at 'other' creatures under God's protection. The assumption that humans are at the apex of all creation is baseless. We have been granted dominion only over life on Earth.

It also seems that creation of all sorts of things is something God likes doing. There is both variety and complexity in our universe that randomness and an arrangement of mindless forces could never produce.

Consider variety: in physics, we know that pretty much everything settles towards a stable point, which is the state with the lowest energy. So, logically, every atom in the universe should be exactly the same. Tweak the fundamental constants of the universe slightly one way and you get Hydrogen and nothing else. Tweak it other way only by billionths and you get only energy and no matter.

The universe exists on a thousand ridiculous 'knife edge' values that produce incredible variety, not a stable uniformity, in nearly everything we look at. This is totally statistically improbable. We live in the most improbable universe we can imagine or understand with science and mathematics. This "fine tuning" of the universe is hard to deny and suggests intention more than anything else we might call upon to explain it.

God has made our planet with sufficient drinkable water for its inhabitants. The other which, although we can't drink it, is habitation and sustenance for other species (some of them, like Cetaceans, conscious and intelligent). Our planet has a number of interdependent ecologies, not all are for humans, yet our entire planetary system would suffer if any one was removed (the Gaia hypothesis). We would be ignorant to assume that we are the only species on this planet that has potential.

God is a big a big and quite rational concept.

The "fine tuning" of the universe is the oldest, easily debunked BS argument..

If the universe were not able to support life, we would not be here to question it..

The Big Bang theory and quantum mechanics include a hyperspace and multiverse. With an infinite number of "dice rolls" with the majority not being conducive to life.

Humanity, nature nor the universe is "fine tuned". They are all filled with evolutionary mistakes, dead ends and inefficiency..

Hell, look at the age and unused space of the universe...it is the least efficient system imaginable..

The "because it is" argument is a juvenile and insufficient answer to the issue of the fine tuning of the universe.

The Big Bang, and the known universe is finite in space, time and energy. Even taken that it may be a subset of a larger reality, it is incredibly improbable right here, right now, in everything that we can observe.

There is no infinity of "dice rolls" except in speculation. Most scientists and theoreticians assume that ideas that suggest infinities instead of rational answers, are invalid. Reasoning built upon such speculative infinities is, therefore, flawed.

The number of evolutionary dead ends and genetic mistakes, in comparison to the profusion and populations of organisms now in existence, is small. It is also highly efficient, even considering the failures along the way. The process of evolution ensures greater efficiency and variety over time. This is observed.

Your assumption that the universe's structure is inefficient is based upon ignorance of its purpose. Consider that; If the mass of the universe were agglomerated, it would be a massive singularity, which as a stable, lowest energy state, is efficient, but is hardly conducive to life. Perhaps then the "wasted space" of a largely empty universe is required to allow niches of life and "efficiency" as you seem define it, is not important.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: GemmyMcGemJew
a reply to: chr0naut
Why would god create billions of inhabitable planets where life can't exist to worship him and provide him money. Saturn's rings do not have tax exemption.

Why would god create a planet that is 70% water, most of which would kill us if we drank it. If we are the chosen species (for whatever reason you choose to believe this) why would he make the planet in this way. Seems irrational to me.

One could easily reason that God doesn't need money, or our worship, or even our acknowledgement of His existence, because If He wanted those, He'd simply make it happen, and we would be helpless to resist His will.

Perhaps the reason He isn't amassing wealth, is the issue of where would He ever spend it? Do you imagine that there is some cosmic corner shop where God would go? I mean what would be the point of wealth to God? Similar reasoning can be applied to tax exemptions (I'd be interested to know who collects the tax on Saturn's rings, and, if taxation law is applicable, why?).

God has probably also created billions of inhabitable planets where life (some of it conscious and intelligent) exists, otherwise "it's an awful waste of space".

The Bible does say that there are several types of non-human, intelligent, conscious beings called angels. Why not other forms of intelligent life that are none of any human's business and therefore wouldn't be included in the Bible. There ARE verses in the Bible that hint at 'other' creatures under God's protection. The assumption that humans are at the apex of all creation is baseless. We have been granted dominion only over life on Earth.

It also seems that creation of all sorts of things is something God likes doing. There is both variety and complexity in our universe that randomness and an arrangement of mindless forces could never produce.

Consider variety: in physics, we know that pretty much everything settles towards a stable point, which is the state with the lowest energy. So, logically, every atom in the universe should be exactly the same. Tweak the fundamental constants of the universe slightly one way and you get Hydrogen and nothing else. Tweak it other way only by billionths and you get only energy and no matter.

The universe exists on a thousand ridiculous 'knife edge' values that produce incredible variety, not a stable uniformity, in nearly everything we look at. This is totally statistically improbable. We live in the most improbable universe we can imagine or understand with science and mathematics. This "fine tuning" of the universe is hard to deny and suggests intention more than anything else we might call upon to explain it.

God has made our planet with sufficient drinkable water for its inhabitants. The other which, although we can't drink it, is habitation and sustenance for other species (some of them, like Cetaceans, conscious and intelligent). Our planet has a number of interdependent ecologies, not all are for humans, yet our entire planetary system would suffer if any one was removed (the Gaia hypothesis). We would be ignorant to assume that we are the only species on this planet that has potential.

God is a big a big and quite rational concept.

The "fine tuning" of the universe is the oldest, easily debunked BS argument..

If the universe were not able to support life, we would not be here to question it..

The Big Bang theory and quantum mechanics include a hyperspace and multiverse. With an infinite number of "dice rolls" with the majority not being conducive to life.

Humanity, nature nor the universe is "fine tuned". They are all filled with evolutionary mistakes, dead ends and inefficiency..

Hell, look at the age and unused space of the universe...it is the least efficient system imaginable..

The "because it is" argument is a juvenile and insufficient answer to the issue of the fine tuning of the universe.

The Big Bang, and the known universe is finite in space, time and energy. Even taken that it may be a subset of a larger reality, it is incredibly improbable right here, right now, in everything that we can observe.

There is no infinity of "dice rolls" except in speculation. Most scientists and theoreticians assume that ideas that suggest infinities instead of rational answers, are invalid. Reasoning built upon such speculative infinities is, therefore, flawed.

The number of evolutionary dead ends and genetic mistakes, in comparison to the profusion and populations of organisms now in existence, is small. It is also highly efficient, even considering the failures along the way. The process of evolution ensures greater efficiency and variety over time. This is observed.

Your assumption that the universe's structure is inefficient is based upon ignorance of its purpose. Consider that; If the mass of the universe were agglomerated, it would be a massive singularity, which as a stable, lowest energy state, is efficient, but is hardly conducive to life. Perhaps then the "wasted space" of a largely empty universe is required to allow niches of life and "efficiency" as you seem define it, is not important.

Did you really just use "it is just speculation" while making a counterpoint in favor of the existence of God?!?! When every little bitty inch of religion is only speculation?!?!

At least the scientific theories are backed by mathematical models and experimental findings.. The bible is whole cloth speculation.. No math or experimentation had EVER been found to agree or back the bible..


By efficientcy I meant that it took 14 billion years to "create" gods crown jewel (humanity) and we can only exist on about half the surface and that is just one planet in a universe with 400 billion galaxies, each with 400 billion stars, each with roughly a dozen planets...


How in the hell does the fact that 99.9999% of all life on earth is extinct (aka failed try's) prove the earth/universe is fine tuned?!?!

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Your entire premise is based upon the false assumption that the ONLY reason God would not act is due to incapacity.

Your premise takes no account of choice.

God may simply not choose to create something beyond His capacity. If it doesn't exist, it isn't actually part of the multiverse, which is entirely the creation of God, and therefore it isn't a something which would be beyond God.

But if he were to chose to do so??

I just can't imagain that omnipotence can exist and human intellegence beat it...

Rationally, God has reason to do His actions. He wouldn't thrash about irrationally, doing stuff without point or purpose, that is surely not the nature of God as revealed.

I would also doubt that human intelligence is sufficient to out-think God, but if our concept of God were a ridiculous caricature, I wouldn't expect it to stand up to rational onslaught.

What?!?! There is nothing rational or efficient about the universe!!!

It is quit literally the embodiment of chaos and inefficency..

"You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means" - Inigo Montoya.

Why create a universe 14 billion years ago, but only create your center piece 200,000 years ago!??

One could reason that there is a rational function for the existence of time in physics? A temporal singularity is just as unsurvivable as any other.

Why allow children to be raped and murdered, then allow their attackers to become rich and famous??

Yes, if God had created only mindless matter, then it wouldn't choose to do such things, couldn't. Consider, for a moment, your response to such things. Where do such concepts as 'right' and 'wrong' arise from? Surely rape distributes genes "efficiently", why should you, the champion of "efficiency", feel offended by it? One could argue that morality itself points to the existence of God and away from unconscious, amoral, natural forces.

Why have 99.99999% of the universe be EXTREMLY hostel to your center pieces life?

I'm pretty sure that 99.99999% of the universe is ambivalent and has no intent, hostile or otherwise. You are anthropomorphizing the situation for emotional impact, which is irrational.

Nothing about any of the bible is efficient nor logical...and in no way, shape, form or fashion could the majority of the actions attributed (by the bible!) to God be considered benevolent nor good...at best the Christian God would be neutral.

The attributes of God revealed in the Bible are compliant with reason. The Bible almost always explains the reasons behind the things in its accounts. It is not a wry and subtle book, it is VERY plain and clear.

It IS true that God is beyond human morality (says so in the Bible) but as the supreme being who defines all else, we are not in a position to judge God and whatever He wants 'good' to be, is actually the definition of what is good.

originally posted by: LaWnOrDeR92
a reply to: Tiamat384

God being all good or all powerful aside, do you honestly believe that we were miraculously created through a random big bang, which is seemingly so incredibly hard to duplicate if not for some supreme being?

With the exception of life and the universe pre Big Bang, we know exactly how the universe created stars and planets.

Do to the speed of light, when we look back billions one of years, we can track the universes progress era by era..

First explosion of hydrogen: simplest element one proton one electron..

Gravity caused the hydrogen to compact into stars..

The fussion inside the stars creates the other elements, which a supernova scatters.

Then gravity creates new stars that have planets..

All of it is verifiable..

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Your entire premise is based upon the false assumption that the ONLY reason God would not act is due to incapacity.

Your premise takes no account of choice.

God may simply not choose to create something beyond His capacity. If it doesn't exist, it isn't actually part of the multiverse, which is entirely the creation of God, and therefore it isn't a something which would be beyond God.

But if he were to chose to do so??

I just can't imagain that omnipotence can exist and human intellegence beat it...

Rationally, God has reason to do His actions. He wouldn't thrash about irrationally, doing stuff without point or purpose, that is surely not the nature of God as revealed.

I would also doubt that human intelligence is sufficient to out-think God, but if our concept of God were a ridiculous caricature, I wouldn't expect it to stand up to rational onslaught.

What?!?! There is nothing rational or efficient about the universe!!!

It is quit literally the embodiment of chaos and inefficency..

"You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means" - Inigo Montoya.

Why create a universe 14 billion years ago, but only create your center piece 200,000 years ago!??

One could reason that there is a rational function for the existence of time in physics? A temporal singularity is just as unsurvivable as any other.

Why allow children to be raped and murdered, then allow their attackers to become rich and famous??

Yes, if God had created only mindless matter, then it wouldn't choose to do such things, couldn't. Consider, for a moment, your response to such things. Where do such concepts as 'right' and 'wrong' arise from? Surely rape distributes genes "efficiently", why should you, the champion of "efficiency", feel offended by it? One could argue that morality itself points to the existence of God and away from unconscious, amoral, natural forces.

Why have 99.99999% of the universe be EXTREMLY hostel to your center pieces life?

I'm pretty sure that 99.99999% of the universe is ambivalent and has no intent, hostile or otherwise. You are anthropomorphizing the situation for emotional impact, which is irrational.

Nothing about any of the bible is efficient nor logical...and in no way, shape, form or fashion could the majority of the actions attributed (by the bible!) to God be considered benevolent nor good...at best the Christian God would be neutral.

The attributes of God revealed in the Bible are compliant with reason. The Bible almost always explains the reasons behind the things in its accounts. It is not a wry and subtle book, it is VERY plain and clear.

It IS true that God is beyond human morality (says so in the Bible) but as the supreme being who defines all else, we are not in a position to judge God and whatever He wants 'good' to be, is actually the definition of what is good.

An omnipotent being would not be held back by time and space. He would not be required to play by rules, because he wrote and at any time could rewrite them.. So there should be no restrictions he faces..


How does God not care about the free will of a child who is raped and murdered??

How could a good god sit back and watch, knowing he could step in at anytime and stop it..

Hell he could make the child molester, no longer a molester, give him a flat tire, exc...

God had no problem commiting genocide on the phillistines, sodium and gohmora or the pre flood population..shouldn't he have stood back and been like:

"Sorry, they have free will.."

Also isn't God constantly orcastrating the universe?? How does free will fit in if he is creating all the variables??? That's not free will... That is a set of options dictated by chaos and nature...

Unless your a child molester who enjoys raping and murdering children... Then free will trumps all....

Yea...

a reply to: chr0naut

Oh even better....

What if the kid wasn't Christian!!!

So God just sat back and watched this child be raped and murdered, then is going to sentence them to HELL!!!!

What if the child molestor is Christian and honestly repents afterward??

He gets eternal paradise while his victim burns...



Now that's a God I can get behind...sarcasm...

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

Did you really just use "it is just speculation" while making a counterpoint in favor of the existence of God?!?! When every little bitty inch of religion is only speculation?!?!

At least the scientific theories are backed by mathematical models and experimental findings.. The bible is whole cloth speculation.. No math or experimentation had EVER been found to agree or back the bible..


By efficientcy I meant that it took 14 billion years to "create" gods crown jewel (humanity) and we can only exist on about half the surface and that is just one planet in a universe with 400 billion galaxies, each with 400 billion stars, each with roughly a dozen planets...


How in the hell does the fact that 99.9999% of all life on earth is extinct (aka failed try's) prove the earth/universe is fine tuned?!?!

There are two mathematical proofs of the existence of God, one by Euler, one by Gödel (Gödel's proof has additionally been ratified by further analysis as rigorous and correct). There are many things in science that have no explanation other than the actions of a directed, powerful, creative intelligence. There are also empirical, rational, deductive and inductive arguments, as there are many subjective arguments. Hardly speculation!

You stated that "99.9999% of all life on earth is extinct (aka failed try's)". Firstly, if it is life and if it is on Earth, then it isn't extinct, is it? But I forgive you, because you are obviously using the terms figuratively. Actually, if you do a study of phylogenies, the percentage of failed branches to successful branches is much less.

The 99.9999% figure assumes that there is infinite genetic variability in each of our genomes. There isn't. The human genome, it now appears has less than 20.000 functional genes. Similarly, the rest of biology's genetic payload has been greatly overstated and therefore genetic variability is a lot less than when that 99% number was guestimated (based upon unlimited variability).

The most complete and current phylogenic tree, which includes many extinct branches, is online here. From it, I would suggest that the percentage should be revised downwards, significantly!

But, the process of weeding out the less functional genes actually increases biological efficiency. The opposite of what you suggested.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

"Sodium and Gohmora" - gotta admit I LOL'd at that.

But the topic is serious.

God has taken action against sinners (according to many faiths). It's also all through the Bible where He punishes sinners.

But detractors blame Him for that just as much as the blame Him for not taking action. Go figure which side is being irrational!

The free will of the child is the same free will as the malefactor. You can't have free will if there is no choice between good and evil. God didn't create evil. Evil is the result of our choices and actions. We create evil.

Since it is our creation, shouldn't it be our responsibility, as ethical beings, to stop it?

Anyway, I have to go right now but I'm really enjoying your input as foil to my debate. Please don't take anything I say as a personal attack and feel free to respond as you would like.

a reply to: chr0naut


www.pbs.org...

Shows that 99.9% of all previous species have already gone extinct..



Your mathmatical proofs and unexplained scientific facts that elude to a creator are garbage..

There is no mathmatical consensus on his findings, in fact they are totally rejected by the entire scientific/mathematical communities..


Here is one mathmaticiams opinion on the fake point thought up by a guy 400 years ago....

" It wasn't. Maybe it was just hyped that way, sort of like the Higgs-Boson. But it really doesn't have anything to do with God.

It's a sort of unifying identity in mathematics, containing each of the fundamental operations (additive, multiplicative, exponential) and each of the fundamental constants (e, i, pi, 1, 0) combined in a theorem that united trigonometry, analysis, and algebra and geometry. It's really an amazing identity, and the proofs for it are diverse and fascinating, but It has nothing to do with god whatsoever.

There is a popular (probably untrue or at least embellished) anecdote about Euler being asked to debate Diderot on the existence of God, and he quickly blurted out some mathy stuff in an attempt to confuse and belittle Diderot. It worked, but the "mathy stuff" wasn't Euler's identity. According to the story (wiki), what Euler used was:



Which is a mathematical equivalent of gibberish - it's a general form that doesn't actually mean anything. While Leonhard Euler was himself a Christian, it is completely inconceivable that he himself actually thought this was proof of God. It's a non-sequitur, intended to be humorously surprising. Euler knew damn well that it was not really proof of anything at all, much less God.
Written Feb 3, 2015 •
"

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JoshuaCox

"Sodium and Gohmora" - gotta admit I LOL'd at that.

But the topic is serious.

God has taken action against sinners (according to many faiths). It's also all through the Bible where He punishes sinners.

But detractors blame Him for that just as much as the blame Him for not taking action. Go figure which side is being irrational!

The free will of the child is the same free will as the malefactor. You can't have free will if there is no choice between good and evil. God didn't create evil. Evil is the result of our choices and actions. We create evil.

Since it is our creation, shouldn't it be our responsibility, as ethical beings, to stop it?

Anyway, I have to go right now but I'm really enjoying your input as foil to my debate. Please don't take anything I say as a personal attack and feel free to respond as you would like.

Oh I'm pretty sure there has been no city in the history of the planet that did not have a decent percent of its population be children... So I don't know why that is funny...

I mean (according to the bible) he murdered every man woman and child in the city, even turning an innocent woman into a salt pillar for the heinous crime of looking backwards...

Nothing even resembling a benevolent God..

God created us, the universe and the devil, meaning he created the fruits of all 3 factors..obviously.


Same here on the "please don't take offense" tip. Neither one of us gets to decide such things, so it is just BS entertainment!



Thank you for the courtesy..I try not to attack individuals and go for their point , but can put a badly placed "you" in there that seems otherwise.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I was having a chuckle at the spelling, not the story.

a reply to: chr0naut

You will be laughing a lot debating me...I don't proof read much...

:p

a reply to: LaWnOrDeR92

Yea becauae god is a fable for children.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

How is he provable?

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yeah God created evil. The old testament even said I the Lord Yahweh create good and evil. Therefore he is responsible. Of course I dont believe in his existence.

a reply to: chr0naut

Nope God created evil according to scripture.

Isaiah 45:17
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: chr0naut

Nope God created evil according to scripture.

Isaiah 45:17
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

There you go, it proves Lex Luthor was right all along...damn aliens..