Better reasons to quit Christianity

[spockrates]

I propose we use the meaning of the word omnipotent that is not logically absurd. If we say, like some mistakenly believe, that omnipotence is the power to do anything at all, then that means it is the power to make a person 100% honest 100% of the time and (at the same time) 100% dishonest 100% of the time. If we say omnipotence is the power to do anything at all, then it would be the power to make a circle that is not only perfectly round, but also has four right angles at the same time. If we say omnipotence is the power to do anything at all, then it would be the power to make an object that is completely white and completely black at the same time. Such propositions are self-contradictory, illogical and absurd!

So I don't see anyway it is logically possible for omnipotence to be the power to do absolutely anything at all--no matter how utterly ridiculous it is. What I suggest is that omnipotence is instead the power to do anything that is not self-contradictory, is not illogical and is not absurd. Would you agree with this definition of the word? Or do you think it nonsensical for me to make such a suggestion?

Sounds fine and dandy. On that note, while some waste their time worshipping a creature constrained by logic I'll spend my time feeling awe and reverence for the thing that gave rise to those "laws of logic"...since they're clearly superior than this god creature to begin with. fewer bullshit fairy tale attachments, no fucking ridiculous commandments. Lets start making your god tales consistent with logic btw, would you like to do that? I doubt it very much. I think this is a tactic used only within a narrow scope to evade an argument for which the original proponents of these god's powers were completely and utterly ignorant of (not that they should have been...because the argument against omnipotence is older than the christian god to begin with).

What is that thing that gave rise to the wisdom of logic? Tell me so that I might worship it!

---

Yes. Perhaps I could make a world where every door to Bill's success was unlocked, but wouldn't the choice would still be Bill's to open the doors? Here is an example: I have a son who is brilliant. My wife is a high school teacher and has seen his aptitude scores and they are off the charts. He has everything going for him, but now, as a high school graduate, he is working at a food store. We offered to pay his way to college, and he refused. Why? He chose drugs and decided he didn't want to try to do anything more with his life that bag groceries and collect shopping carts. With his intelligence, he really has an advantage over others, but he chose to under achieve. No matter how many doors have been unlocked for him, he has chosen not to go through them.

Now you might say God chose to make Bill Gates a success, and chose to make my son less of a success, but I think a more reasonable explanation is that they both made the choices themselves--one to take advantage of his advantages, and one to not take advantage of his advantages.

No, not if you invoke precongnition. Precognitions describes a state from the observers end, it's mirror image is predestination from the observed's end. It doesn't even matter if the precognitive observer chose the initial states, or any of the given outcomes. A precognitive human being with no other abilities whatsoever would completely erode the notion of free will, let alone a precognitive god with a whole host of other abilities and stated plans.

Your son sounds like a brilliant grocery bagger, no shame in that, someone has to bag groceries. Why did he refuse your offer to pay for college btw (if you don't mind my asking)?

(alot of people score off the charts and nevertheless don't end up being doctors btw, I dig holes and change shitty diapers.......I'm also very frequently under the influence..lol)

Yes, an example of precognition is fortune telling. I agree that the God concept is understood to be able to do more than simply foretell what the future will be, and so predestine some outcomes. But I don't think the concept necessarily requires the removal of the freedom of choice from one so predestined. An omnipotent God might guide or limit the choices of individuals, but as long as they always have a choice between two or more alternatives, they still have the freedom to choose. Such a God might isolate people who make choices contrary to his desires, or remove people altogether (by bringing about their deaths, or removing them from a position of power, for example) but they would still be free to choose their own actions, even though their actions would not prevent the final outcomes this God desires. I suppose an apt illustration would be a rat in a maze. The maze might be the limits God places on the life of someone--where he is born, who his parents are, what intelligence he has, what wealth he obtains. The outcome (a dead end or an exit from the maze and a tasty cheese treat) would be up to the rat. The rat cannot choose the maze, or the treat at the end, but she can choose the direction she will take and whether she ends up at a dead end, or with the reward at the exit.