So God could theoretically just choose to make there be no other contradictions, or could choose to make any contradictions they want to be true, true. Got it. — ToothyMaw

Yes. Those who try and create puzzles here are working with the wrong picture - a picture in which the laws of logic are above God and operate as a constraint on what he can do.

Yeah, just too bad God is a monster who lets people suffer gratuitously. :joke:

Now it's getting confusing. — EugeneW

Not to me it isn't. You said you'd be unable to walk if you were omnipotent. That's false. An omnipotent being is able to walk. You can walk, yes? It is clearly confused to think that an omnipotent being is unable to do something that even you can do. That would make them lack an ability you possess - yet they're omnipotent and so anything you can do, they can do too.

Let's consider the stone to lift. You could lift every possible weight. There is no boundary between what you can lift or not. This means there are no heavy or light stones for you. All stones would weigh the same for you, rendering you uncapable of lifting it. — EugeneW

What? An omnipotent being can lift any stone. How are you getting to the conclusion that he's incapable of lifting one? You just asserted that, apropos nothing.

Yeah, just too bad God is a monster who lets people suffer gratuitously — ToothyMaw

By definition he's not a monster. He's morally perfect.

Not to me it isn't. You said you'd be unable to walk if you were omnipotent. That's false. An omnipotent being is able to walk. You can walk, yes? It is clearly confused to think that an omnipotent being is unable to do something that even you can do. That would make them lack an ability you possess - yet they're omnipotent and so anything you can do, they can do too — Bartricks

I you could walk in infinite ways to the supermarket, your omnipotence would make it impossible. So the very fact that you

can

do anything makes you incapable of actually doing it.

You are pretty clear in your reasoning, I don't get why some of the smart people on this forum don't understand your arguments. — ToothyMaw

They're not very smart.

He's morally perfect. — Bartricks

A monster, that is.

I you could walk in infinite ways to the supermarket, your omnipotence would make it impossible. So the very fact that you
can
do anything makes you incapable of actually doing it. — EugeneW

What? That makes no sense at all. God can walk to the supermarket if he wants to.

I'm just messing with you.

But we have no idea what logical deductions are valid or not according to your view of God. Any random deduction could be absolutely worthless because its negation could also (secretly) be true. We are just groping in the dark, really.

What? That makes no sense at all. God can walk to the supermarket if he wants to. — Bartricks

If he could do it in every way he couldn't.

No, the world 'monster' is clearly being used in a morally loaded way. That is, it is being used to express the idea that God is immoral. But that's a contradiction. God is morally good, not morally bad. A morally bad person is not God anymore than a married man is a bachelor.

If he could do it in every way he couldn't. — EugeneW

Nonsense. Are you a Buddhist?

he could do it in every way he couldn't.
— EugeneW

Nonsense. Are you a Buddhist? — Bartricks

Then how does he walk to the supermarket? No I'm not a Buddhist.

Eugene, you aren't making sense. Read my reply to you earlier in the thread.

No, the world 'monster' is clearly being used in a morally loaded way. That is, it is being used to express the idea that God is immoral. But that's a contradiction. God is morally good, not morally bad. A morally bad person is not God anymore than a married man is a bachelor. — Bartricks

To do only good is just as bad as to do only bad. Both ways are monstrous.

Its over, Eugene, Bartricks has the high ground.

I guess what I'm saying is that if the consequences or parameters of a decision or course of action can be measured, we could theoretically have chosen otherwise; it could have been different — ToothyMaw

Exactly. And having no measures means impotency.

God could make my head explode right now, if she wanted. That's pretty measurable.

Its over, Eugene, Bartricks has the high ground. — ToothyMaw

What is that supposed to mean? Her arguments haven't convinced me. Maybe they convinced you but not me. Everything can be argued away with omnipotence. And that includes omnipotence. Simple as that.

That yes. But how he would do it not. She would not even know how to start.

It was a joke.

Exactly. And having no measures means impotency. — EugeneW

So why wouldn't God's actions be measurable? It's like the walking/circle example I gave. Infinite choices doesn't imply that one cannot deliberately choose a course of action, provided there are parameters or measurable consequences.

Infinite choices doesn't imply that one cannot deliberately choose a course of action — ToothyMaw

That's a false comparison. All ways to walk are equal. If you can walk without measure you can't walk at all.

Why can't God walk with measure?

Why can't God walk with measure? — ToothyMaw

Because they need music to walk on.

Why can't God walk with measure? — ToothyMaw

They can walk with all measures, if omnipotent. And that's the problem.

And that's the difference with your example. You can walk in infinite ways to the circle. But not with infinite measures. You're body-bound.

You need to explain why omnipotence implies that God cannot deliberately select a measurable course of action. God could know that if they stimulate my brain the right ways, I'll black out and smack my face against my desk. Or they could stimulate my brain so that I feel intense pleasure. I perceive those things, so, to me at least, the consequences of God's actions are measurable. Or they could do anything to my brain, and I will likely perceive it, and, thus, it is measurable to me.

Really God could make me have any brain-state, but that doesn't mean that all of those brain-states are the same.

He could, if OP, stimulate your brain in all possible ways. And that paralyzes him. Just imagine. You could walk to the other side of the street in all possible ways. Not via all paths, but actually walking in all possible ways. Which way would you apply?

Any way I please, I imagine.

Which is?