Can God Create an Unliftable Object?

[lvlastermind]

If there is a god I'm positive that everyone out there would agree that his power is infinite. BUT. If God truly has infinite power is it possible for God to purposely make an object so heavy that he himself cannot lift it?

 

[olde drunk]

only IF s/he/it wanted to see what it felt like to be powerless!

love&peace,
olde drunk

 

[omin]

Infinity is Finite.

If there is a god I'm positive that everyone out there would agree that his power is infinite. BUT. If God truly has infinite power is it possible for God to purposely make an object so heavy that he himself cannot lift it?

I tried singing "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall". I got bored and quit, because the song took to long to finish, so I never experienced the song in it's entirety. When I tried to think of infinity and endless space, I never got there, the same thing happened.

Infinity is finite. I'll prove it. Take for instance mass. Mass may be imaginatively split infinitely. The parts may be imaginatively split but physically they do not increase or decrease in mass, so parts are always finite. Is the universe infinite? Every finite piece can make up a finite whole. How could finite peices make an infinity? An infinite amount of peices. But try to imagine that. Infinity must be finite. Afterall, that's all I've experienced of it.

 

[Prometheus]

If there is a god I'm positive that everyone out there would agree that his power is infinite.

If there is a god, most people would not accept it, so your point is not valid. How could you be positive about this, anyway?

BUT. If God truly has infinite power is it possible for God to purposely make an object so heavy that he himself cannot lift it?

Infinite power is a meaningless catch phrase. What do you mean by it?

If you mean that he has sufficient power to make an object blah blah, then yes. If you don't, then no.

 

[Scott Sieger]

I woudl think this God could de-create anything he creates simply because he knows how to...

 

[olde drunk]

I tried singing "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall". I got bored and quit, because the song took to long to finish, so I never experienced the song in it's entirety. When I tried to think of infinity and endless space, I never got there, the same thing happened.

Infinity is finite. I'll prove it. Take for instance mass. Mass may be imaginatively split infinitely. The parts may be imaginatively split but physically they do not increase or decrease in mass, so parts are always finite. Is the universe infinite? Every finite piece can make up a finite whole. How could finite peices make an infinity? An infinite amount of peices. But try to imagine that. Infinity must be finite. Afterall, that's all I've experienced of it.

that only deals with physical parts. what if these parts are made of an unlimited form of energy that can be reduced, not divided??

by the same token, what if the energy can join with other units of energy, an infinite number, and make infinite combinations and amounts??

love&peace,
olde drunk

 

[cronxeh]

this whole debate is so stupid and every question has a self-stupifying answer like 'only if he wanted to see what its liek to be powerless'

god doesn't exist. neither does hell/heaven/demons or any of that crap you were fed as a child. get a grip and see what's wrong with this world - religion.

 

[THANOS]

I think that there is finite matter in this universe but the matter itself is infinite in age.

 

[omin]

what if these parts are made of an unlimited form of energy that can be reduced, not divided?

All things of the world are physical. All things that can be sensed are sensed directly by the human senses or through human instrumentation that brings effects of physical things to human senses. All things physical, representing everything sensable, are known only because they become thought. Thought represents only human sense (five of them). We may only disuss what we think. All things that we think are physically derived. Energy is perceived by humans. So, energy is physical.

All things known are physical. What is known is limited by temporality of our consciousness. Everyones 'unlimited' or 'infinity' concept has a different value based upon their cognitive experience.

All things sensed have scope. 'Unilimited' energy is perceived only as finite, because it has a value according to ther person's mind and instrumentation bringing it to mind. All things that have a scope can be divided to the limits of perception and mechanical ability. Energy can be divided.

Infinity seems to be just a finite property, the property of addition, which needs the assuption that one can comprehend having added matter forever or pulled two peices of matter away from each other forever and use it in the same sentence.

Infinity means 'a finite thought' + nothing.

 

[omin]

This Glass is Half Full

god doesn't exist. neither does hell/heaven/demons or any of that crap you were fed as a child. get a grip and see what's wrong with this world - religion.

This sounds like an appeal to ignorance. Am I correct?

God cannot be proven to exist. God cannot be proven to not exist. Therefore, God doesn't exist.

I can use the same premises to conclude the converse.

God cannot be proven to exist. God cannot be proven to not exist. Therefore, God does exist.

I think it's understood for convience to say God doesn't exist, but in terms of logic it appears to be an appeal to ignorance. Is there an argument that proves otherwise?

Proof means representation of 'what exists'. Can I prove the word nothing represents 'empty' in the phrase 'the glass is half empty'?

Think of all the space occurring around the objects in your immediate environment. Now imagine all things sensed dissapear. Something positive always comes to mind when this is attempted. Thoughts only represent positive things.

I can prove the glass is half full, because I can compare it with a glass that is full.

Can I prove the glass is half empty with a glass that has no water in it? If you say yes, what have you proven? I think only positive things are infered here. Here is a glass. And here is a glass that is half full.

God doesn't exist means [negation]God. There must first be a sensed God to negate. And negation is based upon the property of displacement, since energy is neither created or destroyed.

get a grip and see what's wrong with this world - religion.

I agree that religious theories do create mental disorder and are harmful to society. The most popular religious theories today are political and mainstream television. Most of us traded a bible for prime time and politics.

 

[Scott Sieger]

God cannot be proven to exist. God cannot be proven to not exist. Therefore, God doesn't exist.

wouldn't a better conclusion be God's existence or non existence remains the subject of debate? ha ...I couldn't resist

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Problems

Infinity is finite. I'll prove it. Take for instance mass. Mass may be imaginatively split infinitely. The parts may be imaginatively split but physically they do not increase or decrease in mass, so parts are always finite. Is the universe infinite? Every finite piece can make up a finite whole. How could finite peices make an infinity? An infinite amount of peices. But try to imagine that. Infinity must be finite. Afterall, that's all I've experienced of it.

Infinity is not finite
Infinity is limitless... things can be larger or smaller infinities in the way they grow, however they are not finite. Your proof is flawed in many ways an obvious way being that mass CANNOT be split forever. You could only "split" it to its basic constitutients aka strings for ur stringest or some other fundamental particle.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Also on god being proven or disproved. I believe both are possible however plausable is a very different story. We may one day be able to develop a way to understand the universe to a point that the current state of our feeble minds would not be able to comprehend. And for the religous folks out there the proving of God is a lot easier story... say the rapture occurs well... that should be a clue or for whatever reason if you believe in God what would prevent him from comming down and enlightening us all of his existence.

 

[Yggdrasil]

Why would God waste his time making a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? Anyway, I can tell you a lot about God, just ask sometime.

 

[Scott Sieger]

tell me about God Yggdrasil...I would like to know

 

[Mentat]

If there is a god I'm positive that everyone out there would agree that his power is infinite.

This is where the problem arises. Your paradox is with regard to omnipotence, but the use of the term "god" conjures up the concept of the creator of the Universe, or the gods of holy writings, &c.

Yes, omnipotence is paradoxical, this has been known since the time of the ancient Greeks (possibly longer). However, not all gods were said to be omnipotent. For example, the God of the Bible stated His own limitations quite clearly in the Bible. The gods of Greek and Roman myth were inferior to the greatest god (Zeus and Jupiter, respectively) and yet even those great gods had limitations, which were born out throughout the legends. Actually, one of my favorite examples is the Egyptian god, Ra. Ra was the greatest of the gods, but "Ra" wasn't his real name. According to Egyptian tradition, knowing something's name gives you power over that thing. So, Ra kept his real name secret, so as not to allow anything to have power over him (though, of course, there was a legend wherein one of the goddesses learned of his real name, and caused all kinds of havoc ).

Anyway, the paradox is one of omnipotence, not of godship. Just thought I'd point that out to keep this from turning into a religious discussion.

 

[loseyourname]

Why would God waste his time making a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? Anyway, I can tell you a lot about God, just ask sometime.

It's funny that no one ever answers this question. The potential omnipotence of an intelligent creator is always defended by saying he would never do it. That wasn't the question. It was not asked whether or not he would do it. It was asked whether or not he could do it. Since you are apparently personally acquainted with this being, perhaps you can ask him for us.

By the way, are you Dr. Courtney Brown or a devotee of his?

 

[THANOS]

I am sure God doesn't exist. But I also believe that God will exist.

 

[lvlastermind]

Why would God waste his time making a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? Anyway, I can tell you a lot about God, just ask sometime.

It's just one of those questions that will probably never be answered.

If a tree falls...

 

[loseyourname]

What? We're four dimensional beings living in a four dimensional world, and we can build four-dimensional objects. What are these other beings (aside from God) that you're referring to?

By the way, if God can create a rock that he couldn't lift, then it is conceivable that there could exist a task that he could not perform. This means he is not omnipotent, which I'm pretty sure was the point of this thread.

 

[Deltron]

The one big problem with religion, or for God at least, is simplicity. In the Bible it says he simply creates humans and the world, and whatever he can create and just set it into existence. A good reason for why people do not exist is how could whatever it is just do that? Well since we have proven physics and math, why does it say it took him 6 days to make earth?

I can tell you right now I could make Earth in its earliest stages, plain, in a lot less time. If God truly exists, I for one believe that it is nearly not this simple. The main reason is that are mind would not, and still hard to fathom, if in the bible it said how he REALLY, made Earth and humans. If you look at DNA structures, and photons, and neurons and ect, God probably had to create this, this perfect structure of Earth and how every things connected. I for one do not think he just droped us out of the mere sky and said bam, you are created. If anything, It was a long process, and certainly trying to explain something like that to people that used to live in Christs time.. is improbable.

Another degrading part of Religion to society, is people now go to Churc to wear their new cloths. Especially, I for one, can not stand those Televised Religous talk shows. A good one for instance, is where the the preacher, slaps a injured in the head and says Jesus has cured you. Well for one, only Jesus could do that him self. What they need is an update on the bible, since now we have found out soo many things, we can comprehend more. The bible is a childs version of how things work/were created.

Thats just my thought about how religion sounds so bogus, and why people really need to actually be religous and believe in more logical concepts, if they do believe in God. :D!

<3 All!

 

[Scott Sieger]

Remember our super hero "Superman" and how the script writers put limitations on his abilities. Why did they limit supermans abilities?
Because if he was truelly omnipotent it would mean he would not have to do anything. Thus one boring show...so we place limitations just to make God worth talking about. The limitations being the nature of the discussions. True omnipotency of God means there is nothing to discuss.

 

[cronxeh]

This sounds like an appeal to ignorance. Am I correct?

God cannot be proven to exist. God cannot be proven to not exist. Therefore, God doesn't exist.

Religion started as a result of ignorance and lack of knowledge. It is continuing to exist today because of that tradition of ignorance, and you never stop to think about 'what if there was never god?' you only think in a really closed-loop frame where if you can't prove or disprove it - then it probably exists/or doesn't exist - this 'superposition' from stupidity is in fact an artificial attempt to make one's life less meaningless, by introducing new empty variables like god, heaven, hell, or demon to invigorate the sense of existence.

God doesn't exist means [negation]God. There must first be a sensed God to negate. And negation is based upon the property of displacement, since energy is neither created or destroyed.

Your attempt to sound intelligent made you sound like a liberal arts philosopher with no scientific background, let alone mathematical one. I won't insult my own intelligence by continuing to reply to you.

 

[Deltron]

With all this science and how things work, would make you think, "How wouldn't there be a God?" I think a lot has developed off of ignorance. One thing I hate most, is religous people who aren't open to thoughts of evolution, thoughts of space and how the universe began, and how it will end or what not. Considering I am religous, I really do think that every thing has to do with science at physics, besides math is the universal laungage right? :D

<3 All

 

[JD]

With all this science and how things work, would make you think, "How wouldn't there be a God?" I think a lot has developed off of ignorance. One thing I hate most, is religous people who aren't open to thoughts of evolution, thoughts of space and how the universe began, and how it will end or what not. Considering I am religous, I really do think that every thing has to do with science at physics, besides math is the universal laungage right? :D

<3 All

As far as I am concerned (not in a worried sense) God exists but not in a way that we can visualise. That's a fair point about religion closing minds and it seems to me that this is exactly the reverse of what should actually happen. Acquisition of knowledge (in whichever form it might take) enhances self as much as contemplation of God. As we cannot "see" God, however, we have to rely on studying the Universe. That is endless in much the same way as God is (to my mind).

 

[techwonder]

I have this magical "blackboard" where the equations I write becomes true. There are several layers of equations, i.e. some are more important than others, but it is a piece of cake to add a new equation ... or delete an existing equation. There are equations for many things, also for the relation between energy and space-time. I'll delete it now and then we will ...

 

[JD]

this whole debate is so stupid and every question has a self-stupifying answer like 'only if he wanted to see what its liek to be powerless'

god doesn't exist. neither does hell/heaven/demons or any of that crap you were fed as a child. get a grip and see what's wrong with this world - religion.

I think that tolerance could be greater regardless of how you view the Universe. Obviously my tolerance would be tested if you were to burn my house down :surprise: . However, if you did it for my benefit then I might be very grateful.

 

[Mentat]

You know what? It turns out that "omnipotence" has no meaning whatsoever. It's not just that it's problematic, or impossible in principle. It actually has no noticeable distinction between itself and "normal" beings that live forever.

A being that exists forever has an infinite number of things that it could do, and an infinite number of things that it will never do (not really that it can't do, but that it won't do). An omnipotent being is a being that has no limitations, except the limitation of having no limitations (it is not capable of being limited, and is thus limited). Thus there are an infinite number of things that it can't do, and an infinite number of things that it can. This means that the only way to tell the difference between an omnipotent being and a normal being is that which would be noticed at the end of infinity (by then, normal beings will have done everything an infinite number of times, but the omnipotent being would still have an infinite number of things it has never done, because it can't), and there is no end to infinity, so an omnipotent being is not distinguishable from a normal being that lives forever.

Oh, btw, if there's an issue with the fact that the normal being has to live forever to be equated with the omnipotent one, just think of the fact that the omnipotent being should be able to self-destruct or be destroyed by something else (since it can do or allow whatever it wants) and so it may also be bound by the finiteness of its life.

 

[Deltron]

JD is correct, in the sense that you can not visualize God. You can not comprehend God. One way we deal with this is that we think its a person, or mabey a soul like us, and call it He or She some times. And since also when we put stereo types on God, it seems less and less likely God could exist, since it sounds so obsured, but only because the way we try and percieve him.

Mentat I think what your trying trying to say is they may, do an infinite number of things, but only if he/she CAN. Now if God is omnipotent, then he can, and may, do an infinite number of things, besides just doing many things to a restriction, based on how long you live.

<3 All

 

[loseyourname]

Is there any particular reason why religious apologists need an omnipotent God? Can't it be enough that he is able to violate or even rewrite the laws of nature?

I think that tolerance could be greater regardless of how you view the Universe. Obviously my tolerance would be tested if you were to burn my house down :surprise: . However, if you did it for my benefit then I might be very grateful.

Burn your house down for your own good? Did you just watch Fight Club?

 

[TENYEARS]

God has never made anything, but everything is made out of God. Do you understand?

 

[lvlastermind]

God has never made anything, but everything is made out of God. Do you understand?

inaccurate

So when in the bible it sais "God created the heavens and the earth..."

Should it have read "God is the heavens and the earth?"

 

[Scott Sieger]

Should it have read "God is the heavens and the earth?"

Now this is a good point...the bible is full of typo's

 

[lvlastermind]

Now this is a good point...the bible is full of typo's

indeed it is

 

[Nexus[Free-DC]]

Let's look at this logically. We have postulated one thing; that God can do anything. Thus he can lift all rocks. It follows that the uber-heavy rock in question is not in the set of all rocks. So for God to create this rock would require the breaking of the laws of logic.

Now we've got two choices. Do we allow the definition of omnipotence to include violating the laws of logic or not? If not, God's in the clear.

Otherwise things get interesting. Once we've allowed omnipotence to do the impossible once, it can happen again. So God could certainly lift a rock that he is not lifting.

 

[Scott Sieger]

Otherwise things get interesting. Once we've allowed omnipotence to do the impossible once, it can happen again. So God could certainly lift a rock that he is not lifting.

Now if we allow God a small amount of cleverness he would simply get people like you and your mates to lift the rock for him any way...
Thus lifting a rock without lifting it...ha

 

[Prometheus]

Let's look at this logically. We have postulated one thing; that God can do anything. Thus he can lift all rocks. It follows that the uber-heavy rock in question is not in the set of all rocks. So for God to create this rock would require the breaking of the laws of logic.

Let's look at this logically. We have postulated one thing; that God can do anything. Thus he can create rocks with any degree of difficulty in lifting. It follows that the uber-heavy rock in question is in the set of all objects that god can create. So for God to create this rock would not require the breaking of the laws of logic.

1. What does your argument have to do with logic, other than your claim that it is logic?

2. What do the "laws of logic" have to do with anything outside the bounds of logic?

As your example shows, even if we pretend that you have presented a logical argument, it has no relevance to the question at hand, other than a theoretical relationship.

By the way, you speak of the rock in question as not being in the set of all rocks. How about applying your "logic" to the set of all things that god can create, which is the topic of the original question.

 

[Scott Sieger]

If you ask yourself the question:

"Am I bound by the laws of logic in what I do?"

The answer would I expect normally be No.

Thus why would we project a limitation of "action with logic" to God?

 

[THANOS]

Can god just lower the gravity to like zero?

 

[Scott Sieger]

more like increase gravity to zero...Increasing the vacuum to nothing

 

[Learning Curve]

this is in reply to omen's statement.

You said that how could finite pieces add up to infinite. well, .333333 repeating is infinite right? you can take out .000003 and it be finite. you can also take out .3 and it is also finite. there just isn't a stopping to the finite infinities.

 

[Scott Sieger]

so there is am infinite number of finities...( chuckles)

 

[TENYEARS]

There will be two things you will witness with my words, your realization of their truth now or your realization of their truth later. You have only two choices.

 

[selfAdjoint]

I'll settle for later. Let me know when it happens.

 

[JD]

There will be two things you will witness with my words, your realization of their truth now or your realization of their truth later. You have only two choices.

Tenyears, can you expand on the implications of this realization now or in the future?

 

[TENYEARS]

When I speak in terms of realization I speak of direct knowing which has occured. This knowing is out there for all to see, to witness. It is the destiny of all humanity. It will happen. I have seen the day of a proving. It will occur in our life times. To what degree, I do not know. I was disappointed though in the vision, for I knew that it did not matter that science/people or whatever proved anything, for it is only the realization of humanity which will make any difference in the future of our actions which will affect the planet upon which we live.

When I speak things which I say are, they come out of my realization of what is. Sometimes outside forces can make changes in our relative lives. There was a day when I watched a certain thing on television, after 1 year of trying and suddenly realized that night that it was indeed real. The experiences then followed.

 

[balkan]

When I speak in terms of realization I speak of direct knowing which has occured. This knowing is out there for all to see, to witness. It is the destiny of all humanity. It will happen. I have seen the day of a proving. It will occur in our life times. To what degree, I do not know. I was disappointed though in the vision, for I knew that it did not matter that science/people or whatever proved anything, for it is only the realization of humanity which will make any difference in the future of our actions which will affect the planet upon which we live.

When I speak things which I say are, they come out of my realization of what is. Sometimes outside forces can make changes in our relative lives. There was a day when I watched a certain thing on television, after 1 year of trying and suddenly realized that night that it was indeed real. The experiences then followed.

perhaps if you could be more specific and sound less like a madman, somebody could understand what you were talking about...

 

[vanesch]

God cannot be proven to exist. God cannot be proven to not exist. Therefore, God doesn't exist.

I can use the same premises to conclude the converse.

I think the main problem with attempting to prove or not, that a god exists, is with the lack of precise definition of what exactly is meant with that word. For example, the litteral interpretation of the god that occurs in the hebrew bible certainly does not exist, for the simple reason that a lot of scientifically wrong statements are made, from the age of the Earth to virgins conceiving children.
The problem is that - except for a few mentally disturbed who, against all proof, maintain that this nevertheless true - most people who declare believing in that god tell you that of course the bible is a piece of ancient litterature written by man, but _inspired_ by a god. So the fact that they wrote down things which, over time, have proved wrong, is just due to that human hand in the business. But in that case, what exactly IS god becomes a moving target! It is very difficult to prove the existence or the non existence of something that remains largely undefined and of which the definition can even change in the course of the discussion.
There is indeed a kind of contradiction into a) praying to god that something will or will not happen, which presupposes that this god has communication skills and has the ability to momentarily intervene in the laws of nature and b) maintain that it is an abstract concept such as "love" or "conciousness".
a) is used as a utilitarian part of religion while b) is used to avoid a proof of it non-existance. But a) and b) are not compatible.
a) could be easily checked in the lab: let's have many people pray that the outcome of throwing some dice will always give 7. Do this 10000 times and make up the statistics. Ok, I know this is an exaggerated and ridiculous example, but the advantage of exaggeration is that it illustrates the point.
(although similar experiments HAVE been conducted in the medical sphere!)

I took as an example the bible, but any great religion works along the same lines. So I nevertheless think that it is more or less established that god doesn't exist, not because we have proof of its non existence, but because the definition is lacking. It is only in the (almost ridiculous) cases when a precise definition is given (usually the people doing this are called fundamentalists) that non-existance proofs are possible.

cheers,
Patrick.

 

[marcus]

The world was created by the great Blaghor to Whom we sacrifice turkeys.

We pray to Blaghor daily that he should give us love and consciousness and that he should constantly maintain the Laws of Physics.
Since we find that the Laws of Physics continue to apply by the gracious will of Blaghor, we sacrifice, every year at the Feast of Blaghor called the Thanksgiving, millions of turkeys as a sign of gratitude.

Then we consume together the Bird of Blaghor, as a way to become one with the Godhead.

Our name for the Bible is "The Lies of Blaghor" because He in His merriment made up the various lies in these books and persuaded scribes to write them down. Blaghor is pleased with some of the stories in the Bible, which he considers uncommonly entertaining.

May Blaghor bless you and guide you and help you lose 5 pounds,

marcus

 

[JD]

When I speak in terms of realization I speak of direct knowing which has occured. This knowing is out there for all to see, to witness. It is the destiny of all humanity. It will happen. I have seen the day of a proving. It will occur in our life times. To what degree, I do not know. I was disappointed though in the vision, for I knew that it did not matter that science/people or whatever proved anything, for it is only the realization of humanity which will make any difference in the future of our actions which will affect the planet upon which we live.

When I speak things which I say are, they come out of my realization of what is. Sometimes outside forces can make changes in our relative lives. There was a day when I watched a certain thing on television, after 1 year of trying and suddenly realized that night that it was indeed real. The experiences then followed.

I follow you in the first paragraph but can you expand on the experiences?