Can almighty God create a task that's so huge even he can't do?

Mba

DuchessLily:
Mba

as in, no, God can't create a mountain that he can't move? Or...

God allows challenges because he's bored of winning all the time. So much power with no competition or peer group or paddy with equal status is a life God has to bear. Thats why he created us so that we can be like him. There is NOTHING too hard for him to do. Same as you.

dajoaneke:
God allows challenges because he's bored of winning all the time. So much power with no competition or peer group or paddy with equal status is a life God has to bear. Thats why he created us so that we can be like him. There is NOTHING too hard for him to do. Same as you.

I'm not sure I get your drift. Do you mean God is capable of being bored and created us as his little play things to occupy himself?

If there's absolutely nothing too hard for him to do, isn't it in his sphere to create a task that he can't do? Since it is creating that task is also something, and it shouldn't be hard for him to create that something.

xcapizt:
as in, no, God can't create a mountain that he can't move? Or...

there is no mountain that God can't move

the same way God cannot become human

DuchessLily:
there is no mountain that God can't move

Good. So if he's almighty, doesn't the premise leads to conclusion that he's also capable of creating a mountain that he can't move? Because if he can't create a mountain that he cannot move then he's not almighty, isn't it?

tartar9:
the same way God cannot become human

Jesus Christ nko ?

xcapizt:

Jesus Christ nko ?

I meant Jesus Christ

tartar9:
I meant Jesus Christ

Okayy, I see where you're coming from. Some people believe that God became human tho. That's just by the way.


But can we really honestly use the adjective "Almighty" to describe God if there are things that remain in the domain of impossibility as regards to his ability. Maybe "some-mighty" would be more appropriate.

xcapizt:



But can we really honestly use the adjective "Almighty" to describe God if there are things that remain in the domain of impossibility as regards to his ability"

like creating a mountain he cannot move,the infinite cannot assume finite human form

The answer is NO, if he can create the mountain dn he can move it

Xcapizt.

Of course God can create a mountain he cannot move. We physics students know that it takes a lot more than power or 'mightiness' to move something.

This old question.

Start by thinking about what you asked?

What is the meaning of "a mountain God cannot move" or "a task God cannot do"?

They sound like clear sensible words until you realize that "mountain" or "task" is a specific word with a specific meaning". But the qualification you have attached suddenly makes them impossible to make sense of.

What would a mountain God can't move be like? What kind of task can God not do?

An equivalent of the question is: can a man make a sentence he cannot understand?

When you consider what a man is and his capabilities and what a sentence is, the question becomes quite meaningless.

The square mile size of all the mountains, hills put together is 14,000,000 sq/mile as of 1930s.The whiteman doesn't know this at the time, i wonder if he knows that still. Already some of those hills or mountains are falling out due to landslides and earthquakes. Who is doing that?
What is the use of the mountains and hills? why will God want to waste that large area of space?
There are no miracles anywhere, GOD is a master mathematician and physicist.

xcapizt:
Can almighty God create a task that's so huge even he can't do?

ihedinobi2:
This old question.

Start by thinking about what you asked?

What is the meaning of "a mountain God cannot move" or "a task God cannot do"?

They sound like clear sensible words until you realize that "mountain" or "task" is a specific word with a specific meaning". But the qualification you have attached suddenly makes them impossible to make sense of.

What would a mountain God can't move be like? What kind of task can God not do?

An equivalent of the question is: can a man make a sentence he cannot understand?

When you consider what a man is and his capabilities and what a sentence is, the question becomes quite meaningless.

this guy is smart. the op is a clueless learner

ihedinobi2:

An equivalent of the question is: can a man make a sentence he cannot understand?

When you consider what a man is and his capabilities and what a sentence is, the question becomes quite meaningless.

We parked rain within the foot mat at the entrance of the calender.

I'll concede that God's omnipotence excludes logical impossibilities, even as we are all quite certain that logic holds no sway over God, which is why some people are able to tell you with a straight face that a perfectly just God can be all merciful.

Interestingly, we might have examples in practice of an omnipotent God creating something outside his power. Consider a God who made it such there would be sin, pain, suffering, etc. If he can make a world with none of these things, then our current pain and suffering are arbitrary. If he cannot, then the pain and suffering he created are now outside his power.

I guess I'll just add this caveat to my earlier concession: with God all things are possible.

" For why should God not be able to perform the task in question? To be sure, it is a task—the task of lifting a stone which He cannot lift—whose description is self-contradictory. But if God is supposed capable of performing one task whose description is self-contradictory—that of creating the problematic stone in the first place—why should He not be supposed capable of performing another—that of lifting the stone? After all, is there any greater trick in performing two logically impossible tasks than there is in performing one? " — Rene Discarte

SNCOQ3:
" For why should God not be able to perform the task in question? To be sure, it is a task—the task of lifting a stone which He cannot lift—whose description is self-contradictory. But if God is supposed capable of performing one task whose description is self-contradictory—that of creating the problematic stone in the first place—why should He not be supposed capable of performing another—that of lifting the stone? After all, is there any greater trick in performing two logically impossible tasks than there is in performing one? " — Rene Discarte

Then it wouldn't be a stone it can't lift....

The planet is not a perfect sphere, for that reason, it shouldn't have a perfect spin or rotation but it does. as the planet journeys around the sun at a specific speed and spin on its axis at a precise speed, and we can't feel any shake or bumping. Why is that?

davien:
Then it wouldn't be a stone it can't lift....

You miss the point as usual.

SNCOQ3:

You miss the point as usual.

And you missed the question as usual...
Can "god" create a stone it couldn't lift?...

And you said if it could create such a contradictory thing and it can also somehow lift it contradictorily negating the stone being created immovable even by itself.....
so then "god" didn't make such a stone then if it could be moved...

gatiano:
The planet is not a perfect sphere, for that reason, it shouldn't have a perfect spin or rotation but it does. as the planet journeys around the sun at a specific speed and spin on its axis at a precise speed, and we can't feel any shake or bumping. Why is that?

You thinking the other way round. The earth has its shape because of its rapid rotation. Cause, rapid angular speed, then effect, oblate spheroid.

For your second, read about relativity. In short, a man sitting in a moving car has zero relative speed to the car.

davien:
And you missed the question as usual...
Can "god" create a stone it couldn't lift?...

And you said if it could create such a contradictory thing and it can also somehow lift it contradictorily negating the stone being created immovable even by itself.....
so then "god" didn't make such a stone then if it could be moved...

This is evident that you actually missed the point.

Let me help you:
Descarte's satirical analysis makes a mockery of a nonsense question— If you'd accept 0x0 = 1, there'l be no logical justification to reject 1x1 = 0.

SNCOQ3:

This is evident that you actually missed the point.

Let me help you:
Descarte's satirical analysis makes a mockery of a nonsense question— If you'd accept 0x0 = 1, there'l be no logical justification to reject 1x1 = 0.

lol!
That deduction still follows mathematical guidelines....the only thing different is that 0 could be defined as 1 and vice versa...

You could say 1 x 1 x 1 = 0
And 0 x 0 x 0 = 1....

You're imposing a false analogy....nobody has accepted that "god" could make such a thing(except for you),...because "god" unlike mathematical terms carries baggage with it's definition...
If you really wanted to represent that question in a mathematically similar way...it would go like this...

Infinity / > infinity (infinity divided by greater than infinity)

Which begs the question of what would be greater than infinity because the axiom of infinity has no defined range....therefore nothing could be concluded about the question because the axiom is useless in getting any meaningful information...

So one could also say that since the axiom of "god/gods" cannot be defined within a meaningful range to estimate things like their capabilities then they are useless terms that have no quantifiable basis....

That was it, but you missed the question and the point!

Can God commit suicide?

Yes, By eating 2 to 3 times a day. and to make it faster, more like non-stop eating.

onetrack:
Can God commit suicide?

Yes, perhaps you are right, the earth is tilted to a side, which is the first imperfectness, plus the earth herself is not a perfect sphere or ball.
When a car is moving on the road, The same way the tyres/wheels of the car glide upon the surface of the tar, is exactly the same way the planets glide upon the surface of ether (that dark space we see up there is also a substance called ether without which light can not travel).
The earth goes round and round on a journey to the unknown to some and the destination known to its builders, how then is it that we travel so smoothly without any whoobling? It is because of the mountains and hills, they serve as shockabsorbers, exactly what is added to the wheels of our vehicles.

Do you think these mountains just grew all by themselves, or out of some pop soup of explosion or somebody or some people made them so through artificial explosion?

Hasn't it ever occurred to you that this heavy subject called God is in reality A living Man?

theAtheist101:


You thinking the other way round. The earth has its shape because of its rapid rotation. Cause, rapid angular speed, then effect, oblate spheroid.

For your second, read about relativity. In short, a man sitting in a moving car has zero relative speed to the car.

Lol, theists are so desperate that they actually deny the obvious paradox of omnipotence

It depends on what types of theist. those that believe in the 1) incorporeality of God (that God is a spirit that can not be seen, if seen can result to death), and 2) The Corporeality of God (God being A Man with far supreme knowledge and wisdom).

DProDG:
Lol, theists are so desperate that they actually deny the obvious paradox of omnipotence