the point of that that example is that it demonstrates the absurdity of the the idea of god. god cant exist without bending the rules of the universe in those ways. of course god can make a 4 sided triangle and a square circle. of course god can make a rock so heavy even he cannot lift it, and at the same time he can lift it easily if he wanted. the point is that god doesnt care about rules or reality. he is a contradiction. but he can be a contradiction if he wants, he is god. if you are going to believe in god, it should require no real effort to believe he can make a square circle. you gave up on the rules of reality long ago. now you understand! this is exactly the same as any statements about god! the words have no meaning! it is as if you are just mumbling gibberish.
originally posted by martin: I think you've gotten confused. The idea of a Supreme Being is not in any way illogical. It might be incorrect but there is certainly a very logical argument behind it. Unfortunately, will have to check in 2morrow....
true, but the existence of a god with rules and "sin", the one almost all of you believe in, is totally illogical. the supreme being of no description is merely entirely without evidence, like the easter bunny. he starts being illogical when you make up rules about his existence, which will almost necessarily be gibberish.
sin was initiated in heaven by lucifer. he thought himself higher than God and was banished along with other angels. lucifer manipulated eve into an act that God had specifically forbid and induced her, then adam into committing it. thus, sin was introduced to the human race. Jesus' death by crucifixion paid the penaly for our sin. however, one receives this forgiveness only by entering into a relationship with Christ by receiving Him as Savior. God doesn't sin and cannot look upon sin. the concept of "degrees" of sin is our rationale, not God's.
The omnipotence paradox is the most illogical argument against God/god/gods that I know. I think CS Lewis said it best. "meaningless combination of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them two other words ‘God can’" (p. 18). In the end, "not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God". As to the rock itself the supposed paradox is easily solvable because the premise of the question is flawed. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything. It is the ability to do anything that is possible to be done. Impossibility is not based on the amount of power a being has. The absolutely impossible can not be acheived by adding more power.
i didnt mean that as an argument against god. clearly god can do the illogical. thats why i said he can make a square triangle. i was sincere. he doesnt play by our rules. he can say something true and have it be false and true at the same time if he feels like it. he is like shroedinger's cat. he can sort of transcend the rules. he can have something so heavy he cant lift it and also lift it. the rules just dont apply to him. we can invent a god of any description, lets not let any perceived absurdity or illogic stand in our way. thats why this discussion is pointless. god created sin, or maybe he didnt. it isnt like we gonna catch him in some inconsistency. god doesnt give a damn about that. his rules allow whatever he wants. if the rules of logic do apply to the god you happen to believe in, good for you. if he can only do what is possible, congrats to him. if you want you could believe in a god that could do the impossible and he would be even awesomer. man, i am way more powerful than god. i can look upon, and in fact really enjoy looking upon really dirty sins.
