(May 6, 2011 at 7:09 pm)Interzone Wrote: His (God's) own hypocrisy (as I clearly demonstrated) does away with any meaningful definition of "fixed perfection." Nonetheless, let us accept your definition of God.You demonstrated that you are capable of stating the logically impossible.
The Jews collated the mass of information they had gathered about God and compiled it into a collection of books referred to as the Old Testament. They conclude attributes of God that he is just. And also that he is good. From human understanding of goodness and justice.. not something we don't understand or have no concept of.
"All good and all powerful" are your own mistaken creations, and not Judaic or Christian. So... you have made up something about a subject you obviously misunderstand, and level that mistaken interpretation for serious consideration at Christians who understand it correctly. Your interpretation might be interesting, and even indicative of your personal state, but they do nothing at all to address Christianity or Judaism.
(May 6, 2011 at 7:09 pm)Interzone Wrote: Was it perfectly just for God to order the killing all Amalekites except for their virgins?Yes
(May 6, 2011 at 7:09 pm)Interzone Wrote: The old omnipotence paradox: can God create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it?Sorry we have no respect for that fallacy around here.
Ryft Wrote:How does it contain multiple questions? And how is the fallacy committed? Consider two illustrative examples first. There is the familiar and classic example, “Have you stopped beating your spouse?” As the student of philosophy is typically shown, there are actually two questions being asked here. The first is, “Have you beaten your spouse?” The second is, “If so, have you stopped?” As we can see, the latter is the obvious question being asked while the former is the hidden question not being asked. It qualifies as a Loaded Question because it involves (i.e., is 'loaded' with) two or more questions, and it commits the question-begging fallacy by assuming the truth of spousal abuse in a question about spousal abuse.
Another example question would be, “Where did you put the cookies you stole?” Here there are actually three questions being asked: (i) “Did you steal the cookies?” (ii) “If so, did you put them somewhere?” and (iii) “If not, did you eat them?” The second is the obvious question being asked, while the first is the hidden question not being asked and producing the fallacy by assuming the truth of cookie theft in a question about cookie theft. (The third question exists tacitly if the answer is “nowhere” to the loaded question or “no” to the obvious question).
Understanding this, now consider the question, “Can God create a rock he cannot lift?” Within this single question about omnipotence there are actually two questions being asked: (i) “Can God create some rock?” (ii) “Can God fail to lift some rock?” On the one hand, that is how it is a Loaded Question; it involves or is 'loaded' with more than one question. The former question is the obvious one being asked, while the latter question is the hidden one not being asked. On the other hand, that is how it is fallacious; by virtue of assuming that God is not omnipotent within a question about whether or not God is omnipotent, which it does by assuming that an Immovable Object is logically possible (“a rock he cannot lift”) when the question itself is about whether or not an Irresistible Force is logically possible. As I said in my Opening Statements, “by presupposing as possible the existence of the former one has necessarily denied as impossible the existence of the latter” and thereby “commits the question-begging fallacy.”
