The logical consequences of omnipotence

[Esquilax]

And there we have it. You don't care if your statement is inaccurate. Kind of sums up all atheist objections I've ever seen. Consequently worthless opinion.

Get back to me when you're interested. Until then... enjoy your fantasy

Oh, I care very much if my statement is accurate. The mistake you're making is in assuming that what you say is correct. You're not always right, and you haven't demonstrated why I should think you are right now.

If you wish to convince me, actually do so, instead of just saying "Nuh-uh!" over and over.

To repeat: I have made no claim. You have. I called you out on it. All you can do is try to deflect.

So tell me why you disagree with me.

Let me repeat it for you: you claim that omnipotence, when applied to the Christian God, should be able to construct any illogical reality you pick out of the air.

Then you misunderstood my initial point. Mainstream Christianity tries to push this idea that their god is omnipotent, here meaning capable of doing literally anything. My claim isn't that god can construct any kind of reality, but that the ability to do anything means that one can do anything, and therefore christian apologetics about preserving free will make no sense. Or at least, they don't rely on necessity, but rather some deliberate inaction on god's part. That's what I was saying.

On the strength of that, you call the present working and logical reality flawed. (Yes, if you call God flawed, you also call this reality flawed, because that is what God represents)

Interesting view, but please understand it's not the one everyone shares. In this context, I'm using god as an agent that can affect this reality but, for various reasons, doesn't. My sole point was that the reasons presented by most apologists don't make sense.

You propose an un crashable aeroplane thinking that you don't have to show any logic to prove your claim. Then you scoff at the scientific community who shun you.

No. Christianity proposes the un-crashable airplane when it claims it has an omnipotent and all powerful god. I'm simply analyzing the canonical fiction that your group has presented. And there's nothing scientific about this anyway, since this god claim is untestable and unscientific in the extreme. This is more akin to a literary argument, analyzing the plot holes in a novel.

Unfortunately for you, Christianity rests on what is to you unfathomable logic. Undefeatable logic > proven.

One man's unfathomable logic is another man's unjustifiable bullshit. Go figure.