The Paperweight Conundrum

[KingStubby]

I found a really funny yet perhaps logical reasoning as to whether or not "God" is all powerful. I don't mean to offend anyone with this, as it is just a joke.

Could God make a paperweight that even he couldn't lift?

If No: This means that he can't do everything, so he's not all-powerful.

If Yes: If he's not strong enough to lift it, then he's not all powerful?

[lspiderl]

this is an old one lol but its simple


god can do anything

so he would easly make something so heavy he can lift it then he could give himself the power to lift it

[Sun_master]

But then he could lift it, so he hasn't made a paperweight even he can't lift.

Good question though. I think there was a more serious one, but equally logical - God can't be all-loving and all-powerful. With so many problems in the world, he's either not powerful enough to fix them or isn't loving enough to.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by Sun_master

But then he could lift it, so he hasn't made a paperweight even he can't lift.



Good question though. I think there was a more serious one, but equally logical - God can't be all-loving and all-powerful. With so many problems in the world, he's either not powerful enough to fix them or isn't loving enough to.

yes he did make it THEN he made himself stronger thereby fullfilling the absurd goal presented by teh chalenge



he is more then powerfull enuff to do it but he's loving enuff to know that to grow we need to solve things for ourselves or we will never nearn and grow completely dependant on him for everything

[Sun_master]

I'm not going to get drawn into a religious discussion because, knowing me, it would never end.

[KingStubby]

Originally Posted by lspiderl

yes he did make it THEN he made himself stronger thereby fullfilling the absurd goal presented by teh chalenge

Except that by making himself stronger, he would have a solution to lifting the weight, and therefore he didn't make a weight he couldn't lift.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

Except that by making himself stronger, he would have a solution to lifting the weight, and therefore he didn't make a weight he couldn't lift.

of course he did its all about cronalogical order


your request was to make a wieght he couldnt lift sooo he did

then as he is god you asked him to lift it

he did

he therefore did indeed acomplish BOTH tasks satisfactorily

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by Sun_master

I'm not going to get drawn into a religious discussion because, knowing me, it would never end.

its not even about religion its realy more about word play just using god as the topic of the riddle realy


its often used howeever by nonbelivers as some sort of bazzar semantic proof of gods supposed falibility

in the end its no more accurate a measure of god then the old word logic puzzle

"God is love
Love is blind
I am blind
I AM GOD"

its cute in its clever word play but nothing more

[shocker]

Could God make a paperweight that even he could NEVER lift?

there how about that?

[KingStubby]

I believe that is what I meant to say. Also, Sun_Master, you'reprobably thinking of a quote from Epicurus. I may as well post it here, as it's related.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

I believe that is what I meant to say. Also, Sun_Master, you'reprobably thinking of a quote from Epicurus. I may as well post it here, as it's related.

agian it comes down to freedom of choice

whats the point of having freedom of choice if god is simply going to step in and prevent or interviene in all our choices
the freedom of choice we were given is our greatest gift but it also allows us he option to choose evil
god isnt the answer to all problems we choose to perform evil deeds its up to US to choose to correct our own evil

[shocker]

So when did we pick for nature 2 kill alot of people?

[Daogin]

this thread is asking for a religous debate...

[Sun_master]

Originally Posted by lspiderl

its not even about religion its realy more about word play just using god as the topic of the riddle realy

I wasn't talking about the riddle, I was talking about when you said

Originally Posted by lspiderl

he is more then powerfull enuff to do it but he's loving enuff to know that to grow we need to solve things for ourselves or we will never nearn and grow completely dependant on him for everything

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by Sun_master

I wasn't talking about the riddle, I was talking about when you said

it was an honest respnce to the riddle
its simply the logical answer not a refection of personal belief one way or another


@ dao well it IS the debate forum so at least its the right place


@ shocker we choose where we decide to settle down and live and when we choose to live in unsafe area's like on the coasts or on a major fault line we are forced to deal with the potienal repercussions of that choice
i live in missouri not too far from teh newmadrid fualt line

we havent had a major quake in a long time but its always a possibility so its a risk we take and we prepare for
, i keep food and water enuff for a few weeks on hand , i carry earthquake insurance on my house and i know well the actions to take in a hurricane


when i lived in a potiential flood zone i took proper precautions for that

its all about personal responsibility

even if god was someone we could see and talk to face to face on a regular basis and we knew his exsitance without a doubt we still couldnt expect to depend on him for everything we need to learn to care for ourslves its all part of that whole free will gig

[Shyhalu]

Originally Posted by lspiderl

agian it comes down to freedom of choice

whats the point of having freedom of choice if god is simply going to step in and prevent or interviene in all our choices
the freedom of choice we were given is our greatest gift but it also allows us he option to choose evil
god isnt the answer to all problems we choose to perform evil deeds its up to US to choose to correct our own evil

If God sits idle and allows us to choose evil, then hes indifferent.
If God is has the power to stop that evil, but doesn't, hes malovent as hes willingly letting other suffer.

IE: Tons of children starving in Africa.
If God has the power to stop that, but is content to let them starve to death for reasons they did not bring upon themselves, then hes unjust. If he is unjust he is evil.

Giving your "children" free will does not excuse you from being indifferent to their actions or those that suffer from them.

Originally Posted by lspiderl

it was an honest respnce to the riddle
its simply the logical answer not a refection of personal belief one way or another

If thats what you call logic I feel sad for you.

You want logic? Heres logic.

If God made a paperweight he could not lift, then made himself stronger to lift it. At some point in time, he was unable to lift it, which concedes the point that he is always all powerful. If God is capable of losing power at any point in time and regardless of duration, he is not all powerful as he has a weakness.

The claim is that God is all powerful, not temporarily all powerful.

[lspiderl]

shy your proving very quickly that your a rather bitter and chilidish person


if you cant have an honest debate without attacking people who have a differing viewpoint then dont bother posting

[KingStubby]

Originally Posted by Shyhalu

You want logic? Heres logic.

If God made a paperweight he could not lift, then made himself stronger to lift it. At some point in time, he was unable to lift it, which concedes the point that he is always all powerful. If God is capable of losing power at any point in time and regardless of duration, he is not all powerful as he has a weakness.

The claim is that God is all powerful, not temporarily all powerful.

The actual logic of the first post's question would be answered thus, if one used logic.

Could he make a paperweight he couldn't lift?
[*]If yes, then the fact fact that he couldn't lift it would make him not all powerful. If he made himself stronger afterwards and lift the paperweight, wouldn't it then be impossible for him to make an unliftable paperweight? If anything is impossible for him, then he's not all powerful.
[*]If no, he's obviously not all-powerful, because he's limited by an inability

---------------------------------------------------------------------

If thats what you call logic I feel sad for you....but then again I already pity your intelligence level so I guess its nothing new.

shy your proving very quickly that your a rather bitter and chilidish person

please stop with the name-calling.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

The actual logic of the first post's question would be answered thus, if one used logic.

Could he make a paperweight he couldn't lift?[*]If yes, then the fact fact that he couldn't lift it would make him not all powerful. If he made himself stronger afterwards and lift the paperweight, wouldn't it then be impossible for him to make an unliftable paperweight? If anything is impossible for him, then he's not all powerful.[*]If no, he's obviously not all-powerful, because he's limited by an inability

i never stated my answer was the ONLY logical answer simply A logical answer as to how he could do both

[KingStubby]

Originally Posted by lspiderl

of course he did its all about cronalogical order


your request was to make a wieght he couldnt lift sooo he did

then as he is god you asked him to lift it

he did

he therefore did indeed acomplish BOTH tasks satisfactorily

Of course there's more than one logical answer. But your solution doesn't work when put next to mine because of the "if yes" section of mine. The question in the first post was mainly about how much "omni" was in omnipotence.

[lspiderl]

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/omnipotence/

[KingStubby]

Yeah, that's basically what this thread is about.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

Yeah, that's basically what this thread is about.

the simple fact is ( and what i was pointing out with that link) is that people have debated this for years people far FAR more educated and intelligent then all of us put together and even they cant come to agreement on it so its perfectly normal for us to all have differnt ideas with none of us bein right or wrong in the end lol

[Shyhalu]

Originally Posted by lspiderl

shy your proving very quickly that your a rather bitter and chilidish person

if you cant have an honest debate without attacking people who have a differing viewpoint then dont bother posting

I can have an honest debate without attacking people...I just don't like pretend psuedo intellectuals that can't admit they are wrong and continue to argue invalid, irrational, or illogical points that have been proven wrong...like you are attempting to do in the quote below.

Yes, I am a very bitter person, especially I watch people like you plague society with your garbage.

Originally Posted by lspiderl

the simple fact is ( and what i was pointing out with that link) is that people have debated this for years people far FAR more educated and intelligent then all of us put together and even they cant come to agreement on it so its perfectly normal for us to all have differnt ideas with none of us bein right or wrong in the end lol

Its continued to be argued because of egomaniacs that will go out of their way to argue something that is simply wrong.

Your solution has been proven flawed twice already, just accept you are wrong and your solution does not work rather than trying to dig crap up that says "Well people smarter than me have been arguing for years! So I can't be wrong!".

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by Shyhalu

I can have an honest debate without attacking people...I just don't like pretend psuedo intellectuals that can't admit they are wrong and continue to argue invalid, irrational, or illogical points that have been proven wrong...like you are attempting to do in the quote below.

Yes, I am a very bitter person, especially I watch people like you plague society with your garbage.



Its continued to be argued because of egomaniacs that will go out of their way to argue something that is simply wrong.

Your solution has been proven flawed twice already, just accept you are wrong and your solution does not work rather than trying to dig crap up that says "Well people smarter than me have been arguing for years! So I can't be wrong!".

seems to me that YOUR the only egomaniac here
you flatly refuse to acknolege that anyone else can have a valid point

in the end its an excersise in futility its a simply wordplay logic puzzle you need A to get B but you cant get A unless you have B

its not MENT to be solved because its unsolveable instead its supposed to inspire inteligent debate and exchange of idea's as various people play with and twist the logic from all sides to fit tehre desired result , its and other puzzles like it are common tools to strenghten debate skills and puzzle soving and to teach people to look at things from multiple angles but some closed minded individuals try to twist things to try and serve some closed minded viewpoint ( in this case trying to ACCUALY prove the limits of gods abilities) rather tehn realizing that the topic of the puzzle is irrelevent


( and jsut an fyi for someone trying to use this to prove god is not all powerfull and by default try to disprove his exsistance they lose by simply making the attempt because in making the attempt to prove that gods not all powerfull they already admit to his exsistance )





on a more direct note it seems to me that you are not yet capable of divorcing your ego from a discusion of logic , (and by ego i mean the accualy definition not any kind of abstract that might be twisted as some insult )

the point of a logic puzzle like this is to be able to argue it form any side at any time , as the side arguing agianst the possiblity is over represented i assumed the opposite position for the enjoyment of debate however i can equaly argue it from the other side and possibly even from a few farther abstract angles as im sure stubby and a few others could if they so choose


the trick is to learn to remove your personal feelings fromt eh equation you cant let them color the issue

thats not to say that ALL debate is to be emotionless however in the case of a logic puzzle like this all it does is close you off from any growth as a person

[KingStubby]

Originally Posted by lspiderl

( and jsut an fyi for someone trying to use this to prove god is not all powerfull and by default try to disprove his exsistance they lose by simply making the attempt because in making the attempt to prove that gods not all powerfull they already admit to his exsistance )

They wouldn't "lose" because they said the word "God." For example, if I said "I don't believe in God," would I lose because I acknowledged that many people do?

Shyalhu, could you please stop? You're not even debating the topic any more, you're just calling people names and insulting their intelligence.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

They wouldn't "lose" because they said the word "God." For example, if I said "I don't believe in God," would I lose because I acknowledged that many people do?

Shyalhu, could you please stop? You're not even debating the topic any more, you're just calling people names and insulting their intelligence.

ah but the differnce is your debating the logic puzzle for its intended purpose not trying to use it as some wierd way of disproving god therefore your simply arguing the logic of the word play as opposed to trying to use it for something thats not its intended pourpose

[Fuzone]

Well,this is my personal opinion.
I think he can,but he cannot lift it.
So he is not all powerful.
However he can summon his assistants to help him lift it,so he can lift it with the help of someone.

[lspiderl]

int he end its simply agreed that even an omnipotent being is not required to bring about an impossible state to be omnipotent therefore while he can do either or he will not attempt to do both since it would bring about an impossible state like creating a shapeless cube by its very difinition its impossible therefore is irrelevent


( paraphrased from teh link i posted earlier)

[KingStubby]

So one cannot be "truely" omnipotent. And by that I mean able to to literally anything.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

So one cannot be "truely" omnipotent. And by that I mean able to to literally anything.

no it simply means that making the completly immpossible happen isnt a requirement for omnipotence



a square is 4 flat equal sides so even someone omnipotent cant make a shapeless square that doesnt make tehm not omnipotent it simply means that its something thats immpossible no matter how much power you have therefore its not relevant

[KingStubby]

What about the ability to make objects impossible to lift and being able to lift anything?

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

What about the ability to make objects impossible to lift and being able to lift anything?

theoreticly speaking here an omnipotent being would have teh ability to effeect mass as this while beyond our ability to do is not outside the relm of possiblity

however makin something it can never be is another thing all together

agian i refer to eh square conundrum

IF the very deifinition of a square is an object with 4 straight equal sides

no amount of power or ability would be able to make a shapeless square

at best they could change teh definition of the WORD square but thats not teh same as making a shapeless square

an omnipotent being would in effect have the POWER to do ANYTHING that is accualy possible ( not limited by our human constraints) i.e. an omnipotent being would be able to travel faster than light since it IS possible even if its a task well beyond human ability at the momnent , but theres a differnce between doing whats possible but beyond the power of most and doing the immpossible

even a task like changing water into whine would be a simple matter of rearanging atoms which is a task beyond humans at this time but not outside the relm of posiblity

[KingStubby]

I think that this topic has been beaten and discussed to death.

Good work, everyone.

[lspiderl]

Originally Posted by KingStubby

I think that this topic has been beaten and discussed to death.

Good work, everyone.

with the one exception it was lots of fun

[shocker]

god is all powerfull so he can do both by breaking the laws of the univers in a way that man can never understand, allowing him to do both