Perfection and omnipotent

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I thought you were talking about the meaning of the word.
“Really and how will a illogical inconsistency of the meaning of omnipotence be understood?"
Inconsistency of meaning (of omnipotence), right?

I am, and how it doesn’t make sense.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Kagrenac wrote: Perfection is an impossibly thing, just as infinite.

Tell that to Pi!

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I thought you were talking about the meaning of the word.
“Really and how will a illogical inconsistency of the meaning of omnipotence be understood?"
Inconsistency of meaning (of omnipotence), right?

I am, and how it doesn’t make sense.

Okay, so how I read it, I was addressing the inconsistency part as in the multiple ways that it is seen as. (I.E. some people see it defined as only being what is logically possible, others see it defined as being anything, true to word)

1indainfinite wrote:

Kagrenac wrote: Perfection is an impossibly thing, just as infinite.

Tell that to Pi!

Pi is a number like square root of 2.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I thought you were talking about the meaning of the word.
“Really and how will a illogical inconsistency of the meaning of omnipotence be understood?"
Inconsistency of meaning (of omnipotence), right?

I am, and how it doesn’t make sense.

Okay, so how I read it, I was addressing the inconsistency part as in the multiple ways that it is seen as. (I.E. some people see it defined as only being what is logically possible, others see it defined as being anything, true to word)

...

Gplex wrote: Neither of these things when attributed to a god, makes any sense at all.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Gplex wrote:

1indainfinite wrote:

Kagrenac wrote: Perfection is an impossibly thing, just as infinite.

Tell that to Pi!

Pi is a number like square root of 2.

Fine tell that to numbers in general sure things like numbers and math in general is an abstract thing making some sort existent non-existent force.

OYG god is calculator!

I’m just bullshitting
Translation: Do not take anything I say literally.

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I thought you were talking about the meaning of the word.
“Really and how will a illogical inconsistency of the meaning of omnipotence be understood?"
Inconsistency of meaning (of omnipotence), right?

I am, and how it doesn’t make sense.

Okay, so how I read it, I was addressing the inconsistency part as in the multiple ways that it is seen as. (I.E. some people see it defined as only being what is logically possible, others see it defined as being anything, true to word)

...

Gplex wrote: Neither of these things when attributed to a god, makes any sense at all.

Okay, and a lot of things don’t make sense. Lots of things with quantum physics doesn’t make sense to me.
Though, like I said before, I thought you were talking about the multiple meanings of omnipotence, and asking how we’ll understand that. (which, to me, is asking how we’ll agree on the meaning of it on a more technical level)

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I thought you were talking about the meaning of the word.
“Really and how will a illogical inconsistency of the meaning of omnipotence be understood?"
Inconsistency of meaning (of omnipotence), right?

I am, and how it doesn’t make sense.

Okay, so how I read it, I was addressing the inconsistency part as in the multiple ways that it is seen as. (I.E. some people see it defined as only being what is logically possible, others see it defined as being anything, true to word)

...

Gplex wrote: Neither of these things when attributed to a god, makes any sense at all.

Okay, and a lot of things don’t make sense. Lots of things with quantum physics doesn’t make sense to me.
Though, like I said before, I thought you were talking about the multiple meanings of omnipotence, and asking how we’ll understand that. (which, to me, is asking how we’ll agree on the meaning of it on a more technical level)

Dont do that.. dont make a argument from ignorance..
Im saying all powerful can not exist. Because how can a all powerful being stop itself?

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I thought you were talking about the meaning of the word.
“Really and how will a illogical inconsistency of the meaning of omnipotence be understood?"
Inconsistency of meaning (of omnipotence), right?

I am, and how it doesn’t make sense.

Okay, so how I read it, I was addressing the inconsistency part as in the multiple ways that it is seen as. (I.E. some people see it defined as only being what is logically possible, others see it defined as being anything, true to word)

...

Gplex wrote: Neither of these things when attributed to a god, makes any sense at all.

Okay, and a lot of things don’t make sense. Lots of things with quantum physics doesn’t make sense to me.
Though, like I said before, I thought you were talking about the multiple meanings of omnipotence, and asking how we’ll understand that. (which, to me, is asking how we’ll agree on the meaning of it on a more technical level)

Dont do that.. dont make a argument from ignorance..
Im saying all powerful can not exist. Because how can a all powerful being stop itself?

I’m just saying how I understood your earlier question, which has seemed to turn out more confusion than anything.

We’re able to stop ourselves, unless you’re talking more about how an omnipotent being could stop another.

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I’m just saying how I understood your earlier question, which has seemed to turn out more confusion than anything.

We’re able to stop ourselves, unless you’re talking more about how an omnipotent being could stop another.

Using us as a example for a omnipotent being, would not prove any of your points.
You must ask yourself things like, could a omnipotent being, make itself not omnipotent?
Could this being create another being that it couldn’t stop?

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I’m just saying how I understood your earlier question, which has seemed to turn out more confusion than anything.

We’re able to stop ourselves, unless you’re talking more about how an omnipotent being could stop another.

Using us as a example for a omnipotent being, would not prove any of your points.
You must ask yourself things like, could a omnipotent being, make itself not omnipotent?
Could this being create another being that it couldn’t stop?

Well you did ask if it can stop itself. Human beings can at a fairly basic level, we don’t need to be omnipotent to stop ourselves, and so far any sentient being is able to do such, so I don’t see how it would be any different for an omnipotent being.
The first one (out of the two) is fairly easy, as there isn’t any real stipulation to an omnipotent being taking away it’s own omnipotence. (similar in a way to how we can take our own lives, for a metaphorical example) To that, I suppose one could say that, because it is omnipotent, it would still have to logically and automatically retain that factor of itself, but just because it can do anything (in this case, keeping it’s own omnipotence while trying to destroy it) doesn’t mean it will or has to.
The second one is one that actually makes sense, along the lines of all the other variants that originate from that classic “can God make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it."

Now, you’re trying to say that the idea of an omnipotent being doesn’t make sense, correct?

Ah yes. Dont feel like responding to the rest.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Gplex wrote: Ah yes. Dont feel like responding to the rest.

lol don’t worry about it, wasn’t really that relevant anyway.

Now, of course, to us an omnipotent being makes absolutely no sense with these logical “loopholes” we can find about it.
That can be simplified to an easy “it doesn’t make sense."
There’s quite a few metaphorical examples to kind of simplify it in other ways:
A fish can look up at an animal on the surface, knowing it can only breathe in water (providing a fish is smart enough to figure that out), and dictates that it doesn’t make sense that that animal can be alive on the surface, as it only knows the life in the water.
Actually that’s kind of a shitty example.
On an individual human level, for me for instance, quantum physics (specifically the sciences behind the double-slit experiment) makes no sense to me. I can apply my known logic to that of other physics and say it shouldn’t happen, or is impossible, etc., but that doesn’t mean it actually is impossible.
The same general type of thing can be expanded to the entire human race. We don’t understand something such as omnipotence and can apply our logic to back up that it makes absolutely no sense.
Obviously, just like the fish and the individual, they’re right to the point that it doesn’t make sense. What they’re missing is that they may not have all the information, knowledge and logic to understand those concepts.

Of course, beyond that, I can’t even really figure what the meaning of this topic is, to be honest. I guess I’m just blabbering on like I always do.

I don’t see why God can’t be omnipotent and perfect.

Red_Calibur9 wrote: I don’t see why God can’t be omnipotent and perfect.

Ask youself this, perfect at what? At not being god? At not being able to create anything?
Omnipotents, the same as perfection, leaves a paradox when attributing it to a being.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote: Ah yes. Dont feel like responding to the rest.

lol don’t worry about it, wasn’t really that relevant anyway.

Now, of course, to us an omnipotent being makes absolutely no sense with these logical “loopholes” we can find about it.
That can be simplified to an easy “it doesn’t make sense."
There’s quite a few metaphorical examples to kind of simplify it in other ways:
A fish can look up at an animal on the surface, knowing it can only breathe in water (providing a fish is smart enough to figure that out), and dictates that it doesn’t make sense that that animal can be alive on the surface, as it only knows the life in the water.
Actually that’s kind of a shitty example.
On an individual human level, for me for instance, quantum physics (specifically the sciences behind the double-slit experiment) makes no sense to me. I can apply my known logic to that of other physics and say it shouldn’t happen, or is impossible, etc., but that doesn’t mean it actually is impossible.
The same general type of thing can be expanded to the entire human race. We don’t understand something such as omnipotence and can apply our logic to back up that it makes absolutely no sense.
Obviously, just like the fish and the individual, they’re right to the point that it doesn’t make sense. What they’re missing is that they may not have all the information, knowledge and logic to understand those concepts.

Of course, beyond that, I can’t even really figure what the meaning of this topic is, to be honest. I guess I’m just blabbering on like I always do.

From what I can gather, you are saying we cant question anything because one day it might be true?
This isn’t a very compelling argument...
Look we know this god can’t do everything, because doing everything would require a being able to create something that can’t be destroyed, then destroying it, its one or the other... If it cant create a object that cant be destroyed, then it can not destroy it, but if it destroyes it then it can be destroyed and in both cases this being by all definition is no longer omnipotent.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Considering that perfection is subjective and that omnipotence is infinite, both are logically foolish words to place onto anything.

If I don’t attribute those words to God, then they do not apply anymore and these paradoxes no longer exist.

Yet, even in the context of omnipotence, let’s consider this:

Why can’t God be omnipotent enough to make himself not omnipotent? If that were the case, he could do so, based upon the definition. Only, he would no longer be omnipotent.

The problem is, HOW do you do that? How in the world could you make yourself not omnipotent? By just removing your ability to do something? What? Make hot chocolate? Well, God is no longer omnipotent because he has lost the ability to make hot chocolate.

But could he not relearn, assuming he has the ability to do so, which if he was omnipotent, he could.

And I start creating a circle.

Haruhi demands you join Anime United!

Gplex wrote:

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:

Gplex wrote: Ah yes. Dont feel like responding to the rest.

lol don’t worry about it, wasn’t really that relevant anyway.

Now, of course, to us an omnipotent being makes absolutely no sense with these logical “loopholes” we can find about it.
That can be simplified to an easy “it doesn’t make sense."
There’s quite a few metaphorical examples to kind of simplify it in other ways:
A fish can look up at an animal on the surface, knowing it can only breathe in water (providing a fish is smart enough to figure that out), and dictates that it doesn’t make sense that that animal can be alive on the surface, as it only knows the life in the water.
Actually that’s kind of a shitty example.
On an individual human level, for me for instance, quantum physics (specifically the sciences behind the double-slit experiment) makes no sense to me. I can apply my known logic to that of other physics and say it shouldn’t happen, or is impossible, etc., but that doesn’t mean it actually is impossible.
The same general type of thing can be expanded to the entire human race. We don’t understand something such as omnipotence and can apply our logic to back up that it makes absolutely no sense.
Obviously, just like the fish and the individual, they’re right to the point that it doesn’t make sense. What they’re missing is that they may not have all the information, knowledge and logic to understand those concepts.

Of course, beyond that, I can’t even really figure what the meaning of this topic is, to be honest. I guess I’m just blabbering on like I always do.

From what I can gather, you are saying we cant question anything because one day it might be true?
This isn’t a very compelling argument...
Look we know this god can’t do everything, because doing everything would require a being able to create something that can’t be destroyed, then destroying it, its one or the other... If it cant create a object that cant be destroyed, then it can not destroy it, but if it destroyes it then it can be destroyed and in both cases this being by all definition is no longer omnipotent.

I’m more trying to say our understanding of the universe, and things in general, is not infinite, just like the fish, it doesn’t make sense that anything could breathe above the water because it can’t, and it’s used to that fact.
Same in a way to us. We’re used to these things being defined as they are, that things outside of it is alien.
-shrugs-
If a being is omnipotent, it could logically rewrite history (how our words have developed and been defined) and the laws of physics, basically erasing whatever confines we have in our language (or whatever else) that prevent it from doing something.
That’s just a possibility, of course.

In the long run, I guess, to try and address the original topic, it doesn’t make sense to us to call something omnipotent because of those loopholes, though from that, the error doesn’t lie in the creature (god) itself but in how we are defining things and seeing things. (though I think I stated that before)

Tyreaus Dreacon wrote: I’m more trying to say our understanding of the universe, and things in general, is not infinite, just like the fish, it doesn’t make sense that anything could breathe above the water because it can’t, and it’s used to that fact.
Same in a way to us. We’re used to these things being defined as they are, that things outside of it is alien.
-shrugs-
If a being is omnipotent, it could logically rewrite history (how our words have developed and been defined) and the laws of physics, basically erasing whatever confines we have in our language (or whatever else) that prevent it from doing something.
That’s just a possibility, of course.

In the long run, I guess, to try and address the original topic, it doesn’t make sense to us to call something omnipotent because of those loopholes, though from that, the error doesn’t lie in the creature (god) itself but in how we are defining things and seeing things. (though I think I stated that before)

you type about this creature as if it was observed, the word people came up to describe what they thought their god would be like is flaw, and not possible.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Gplex wrote: Neither of these things when attributed to a god, makes any sense at all.

I don’t understand your meaning. Are you saying that a deity shouldn’t be Perfect or Omnipotent? If they are neither of those things then what possibly separates them from humanity?

If a deity is not perfect, they cannot set any sort of realistic standard for others to try and live up to. It’s an extreme version of 'practice what you preach'. If a deity is not omnipotent, then they cannot do anything to effect the real world.

Realistically a deity doesn’t make any sense WITHOUT perfection and omnipotence. Unless of course you have some clever explanation.

THE KING HAS RETURNED!