RE: The attributes of the Christian God exhibit logical contradictions.
September 19, 2009 at 3:39 am
(This post was last modified: September 19, 2009 at 3:45 am by Violet.)
Response to Arcanus's opening statements:
To perform the loaded question fallacy, the question must assume that the respondent has acted in a certain way. "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Is the classic example of the loaded question fallacy... and you will notice that it assumes that you beat your wife. "Can God create a rock he cannot lift?" Does not assume anything, and therefore is not a loaded question. Put simply: "Can God create a rock he cannot lift?" is asking if such an action is possible... "Have you stopped beating your wife?" is assuming the action has been done. That is why the question of "Can God create a rock he cannot lift" does not commit the loaded question fallacy. It is a question that is used for one purpose alone: to demonstrate that omnipotence is in itself a logical contradiction.
One might demonstrate the logical contradiction of omnipotence with a different question such as, “What could any omnipotent power create more powerful that itself?” Again the question only calls to mind the logical absurdity of the proposition contained in the concept of omnipotence. And that is the only agenda philosophers had in constructing the question “Can god create a rock he cannot lift.”
Lastly, philosophers only use the word 'God' in their question... because they know that since omnipotence is a logical impossibility, then so is any power, including a god, that is claimed to be omnipotent. Therefore omnipotence remains a logical contradiction, and the omnipotent attribute of the Christian god is likewise impossible.
Another show of where these 'omni's of the Christian god fail:
1. From Gospel, we know that the Christian god is all-powerful - he can do all things which are logically possible.
2a. It is an action "to be" something." (If it were not, we could say that god could not choose how to be, which would be a limitation on 1)
3b. It is an action "to be" ... a god who hates its creations.
4. From Gospel, we know that the Christian god is all-loving.
5. From 1 and 4, we know that the Christian god is all-powerful and all-loving.
6. IF 5 is true, THEN 3b is false. IF 3b is false, THEN 1 is false. IF 1 is false, THEN 5 is false.
Considering that you spent three paragraphs mislabeling the rock argument a fallacy... there is nothing more I can respond to
Edit: added italics to Have and Can for emphasis.
To perform the loaded question fallacy, the question must assume that the respondent has acted in a certain way. "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Is the classic example of the loaded question fallacy... and you will notice that it assumes that you beat your wife. "Can God create a rock he cannot lift?" Does not assume anything, and therefore is not a loaded question. Put simply: "Can God create a rock he cannot lift?" is asking if such an action is possible... "Have you stopped beating your wife?" is assuming the action has been done. That is why the question of "Can God create a rock he cannot lift" does not commit the loaded question fallacy. It is a question that is used for one purpose alone: to demonstrate that omnipotence is in itself a logical contradiction.
One might demonstrate the logical contradiction of omnipotence with a different question such as, “What could any omnipotent power create more powerful that itself?” Again the question only calls to mind the logical absurdity of the proposition contained in the concept of omnipotence. And that is the only agenda philosophers had in constructing the question “Can god create a rock he cannot lift.”
Lastly, philosophers only use the word 'God' in their question... because they know that since omnipotence is a logical impossibility, then so is any power, including a god, that is claimed to be omnipotent. Therefore omnipotence remains a logical contradiction, and the omnipotent attribute of the Christian god is likewise impossible.
Another show of where these 'omni's of the Christian god fail:
1. From Gospel, we know that the Christian god is all-powerful - he can do all things which are logically possible.
2a. It is an action "to be" something." (If it were not, we could say that god could not choose how to be, which would be a limitation on 1)
3b. It is an action "to be" ... a god who hates its creations.
4. From Gospel, we know that the Christian god is all-loving.
5. From 1 and 4, we know that the Christian god is all-powerful and all-loving.
6. IF 5 is true, THEN 3b is false. IF 3b is false, THEN 1 is false. IF 1 is false, THEN 5 is false.
Considering that you spent three paragraphs mislabeling the rock argument a fallacy... there is nothing more I can respond to
Edit: added italics to Have and Can for emphasis.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
