"Can God create a rock..."

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: taoistguy
if god is omnipotent, then she can make a horse that is not a horse.

Evolution does the same thing when things evolve to a point where they can no longer be called the ancestor's species.

ah, so we are expanding the boundaries of our words, definitions and umderstanding? Like, how long is a moment? how heavy is heavy?

originally posted by: taoistguy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: taoistguy
if god is omnipotent, then she can make a horse that is not a horse.

Evolution does the same thing when things evolve to a point where they can no longer be called the ancestor's species.

ah, so we are expanding the boundaries of our words, definitions and umderstanding? Like, how long is a moment? how heavy is heavy?

In a basic sentence that sets no boundaries: "if god is omnipotent, then she can make a horse that is not a horse," I can take it in any direction I want to.

But, I've already answered the OP paradox with my rationale. Though it appears to have been ignored. Here it is below.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: TzarChasm

Only he can see the truth to be able to judge...
Know you will fail just do your best...
It is he who says it best... "Do what you will,but whatever you do, do it with all your might...

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: TzarChasm

Only he can see the truth to be able to judge...
Know you will fail just do your best...
It is he who says it best... "Do what you will,but whatever you do, do it with all your might...

i have a greater sense of self-worth than that. and i will never seek the approval of anyone who isn't prepared to be fully satisfied with me just the way i am. nor will i accept their criticism.

originally posted by: Diderot
I agree with your conclusion, but I have trouble with some of your terminology. Where you use "evidence", I would use "proof" (beyond a reasonable doubt). If someone says that the majesty and wonders of life are evidence of the existence of God, then they are correct: It is evidence, but it is hardly reasonable proof (to me). If a witness in a murder trial swears that the butler did it because he saw the crime play out in a dream, then once again, this is evidence, but it is not reasonable proof. Proof is evidence after it goes through the meat grinder of reason. Proof is subjective; I cannot say for a fact that that cloud looks like a dancing pony.

Finally, the main point of my thread is that we all are far more ignorant than gnostic. A true scientist will eagerly admit that we have just scratched the surface of understanding, and a religious believer sees the ultimate Truth as being locked away in a box called God.

Having been a paralegal for quite a few years, I could tell you that a man testifying to having a dream/vision of a murder would not be considered evidence--so much so that any attorney who would call such a witness would be laughed out of the profession (although it wouldn't stop some from trying).

We could argue semantics all day, but I approach 'evidence' as being something that can be reasonably trusted to arrive at a truth (not a subjective truth, like the shape of a cloud, but a factual, scientific truth). Books and stories produced by many different fallible humans that tells me something supernatural exists doesn't exactly tell me that something supernatural exists.

I guess it comes down to the level of proof the individual needs for a given subject--for some, some stories and faith is all the "proof" they need, but for folks like me, that doesn't even come close to sufficing. But, I'll give most religions credit--the mandate is that one has faith and not proof, so there's the loophole that will never go away.

Best Regards...and I basically agree with your last paragraph.

a reply to: Diderot

What evidence can we provide to prove to a blind man that eye-sight exists? All the forces in our Universe are finely balanced on a knife-edge to allow us to breath and walk but because we are born into the creation, the magic of it all, is lost through ignorance. We swim in God but the blind scoff at those that pretend that eye-sight exists.

btw you are a very gifted writer, I hope you are using those skills to write books.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Diderot

What evidence can we provide to prove to a blind man that eye-sight exists? All the forces in our Universe are finely balanced on a knife-edge to allow us to breath and walk but because we are born into the creation, the magic of it all, is lost through ignorance. We swim in God but the blind scoff at those that pretend that eye-sight exists.

btw you are a very gifted writer, I hope you are using those skills to write books.

i know that people keep asking 'how do you prove this' or 'how do you test that'. what they actually mean is 'how do you prove it easily'. the simple answer is, you dont. science is not easy. and i think most serious scholars prefer it that way, because if the truth is easy to find, then a lie is that much more acceptable. more to the point, it becomes that much more difficult to discern between the two.

a reply to: randyvs

Yes we stumble in the dark, but daybreak awaits.
Then we shall see a bit more understanding.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I found your post to be persuasive evidence of your legal acumen,
and I also find you post to be proof of your wisdom!

(But I don't think that you would ever slap a monkey.)

a reply to: TzarChasm

I believe there are two roads, the short road is religion, the long road science, but both will end up at the same destination, so it really doesn't matter what we believe. When science discovers that our material universe is an illusion ( Simulations back up theory that Universe is an illusion ) the distinctions between religion and science will become ever thinner. God is full of patience (and stillness), the universe very young.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: TzarChasm

I believe there are two roads, the short road is religion, the long road science, but both will end up at the same destination, so it really doesn't matter what we believe. When science discovers that our material universe is an illusion ( Simulations back up theory that Universe is an illusion ) the distinctions between religion and science will become ever thinner. God is full of patience (and stillness), the universe very young.

perhaps the universe is an illusion, but that doesnt tell us what is underneath. and i see no reason why anyone should know that answer, otherwise it would be world famous and no longer any kind of question or debate at all.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Exactly, but its just one footstep closer, we might one day realize all is an illusion, piercing it, another matter all together.

originally posted by: taoistguy
if god is omnipotent, then she can make a horse that is not a horse.

You mean, like a Giraffe? According to the myths Adam and Eve rode a giraffe out of Eden. Almost like when the victorious steel-benders come riding their motorbikes all tattooed and reborn. Giraffes were known as camel-leopards back in the day. Apparently the good lord made them by crossing leopards and camels. Hm.

OK, so joining the discussion a little late. .... lets get back to the original question, it's a simple one.

“If God is omnipotent, then can he create a rock that is so heavy that he can't lift it?”

The question itself seems to create a paradox which cannot be answered. This is only true if you refuse to think clearly and cast aside any personal beliefs and bias. We have 6 pages of proselytizing, preaching, debate and banter yet no one has come to the simple conclusion. Though some claim our immature, unevolved monkey brains can't comprehend such matters (then go on to tell us how god it is), I beg to differ.

In the question, we know only one fact. There is a rock. The question is whether an omnipotent god can make it so heavy he cannot lift it, thus negating his omnipotence and creating the paradox. The only logical answer is that the god in question is not omnipotent. This removes the paradox without having to bend logic, or the laws of the universe. Remember the question was "IF", creating a variable. There is thus only one logical answer to the question as presented.

Now don't give me the "god exists outside our universe ... blah blah blah..." The question was posed in our physical universe .... "a rock".

originally posted by: Primordial
“If God is omnipotent, then can he create a rock that is so heavy that he can't lift it?”

The question itself seems to create a paradox which cannot be answered.

Or maybe it can? Maybe God is the organism we call the Universe, and that he IS omnipotent thus he will contain the most massive desire for being right and the top hand man. Maybe this is the reason all matter we know of, is moving somewhere. God starts by creating a rock. Lifts it. Then he creates a rock he cant lift and evolve himself into a stronger, more powerful God, and lifts it like it was nothing, then he need more matter and he sets off Big Bang, and there you go. In our days the universe doesn't contain all he needs so he created an infinite number of multiverses. Then Chuck Norris came around... and it just goes on and on.

he would use pulleys and levers

And the lord sayest, letith there be a rock heavier then i can lift so that I might create pulleys and levers.

“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—
while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels shouted for joy?

I like your post , Utnapisjtim.

originally posted by: Diderot
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I found your post to be persuasive evidence of your legal acumen,

and I also find you post to be proof of your wisdom!

(But I don't think that you would ever slap a monkey.)

I don't know...depends on what the monkey did.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

The essence of humanity, and the wisdom that we so proudly claim,

lies in the fundamental understanding that right or wrong,

virtuous, or sinful;

we, as the rightful heirs to the will of God almighty,

shall never be reduced to the point of

slapping a monkey!

What more can I say?

Rock was made by that which can take it apart.........think about and ponder the "sounds of silence".......Rock was grown as everything is grown and within the same embryo.Stephan Hawkings and all the Kings men will not be able to quantify the answer you seek in the ways certain layman can.Can you imagine the epic impact the action of a Rose Bloom bursting open would catalyse in complete pure silence.......it would be like a Million Stars like the Sun and their Solar Systems imploding together as one.If you could produce complete pure silence then you could catalyse more energy than Humanity could ever hope to use,ever.A simple Rose in simple silence....and we need to ask where rock comes from?From what can return it to the nothingness from which it has been grown from within.Simple Sound.