If God can do anything can he make a mistake?

If God can do anything can he make a mistake? Dec 23, 2020 21:35:57 GMT SciFive likes this

Quote

Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2020 21:35:57 GMT

Dec 23, 2020 13:14:53 GMT FilmFlaneur said:

Dec 23, 2020 12:57:06 GMT Admin said:

It wouldn't be reasonable to attempt to detect that undetectable dragon. It's undetectable.

But it would not be unreasonable to ask that an omnipotent dragon which is otherwise undetectable (which is after all what we are discussing) in the event prove itself by any impossible act, if one also wishes to prove omnipotence. Or failing that, any clearly attributable act at all. Which would inevitably bring forth reasons why it could, or would not - qualifications sceptics are only too familiar with. You seem to be following in the usual footsteps by offering up reasons why what you suppose cannot, ever, be evidenced or shown. All very convenient.

However the defence ultimately crumbles for, if such a god can really do the illogical or even the impossible, then the undetectable deity can be detectable even if, er, it isn't. So, by the standard of your own qualified exceptionalism, where's the dragon?

Likewise, it also wouldn't be reasonable to attempt to impose limits on a "God that can do anything," including the inability to put thought into action without time.

What you think is reasonable is entirely up to you, but the possibility of complete omnipotence is just not a view held by (for instance) the Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy as I have shown, for the reasons they and I give. All you seem to be saying is that such a thing can be and so there it is.

As I said before, challenging the premise is fine and dandy - especially if the objective is to make those snags fit.

It is those who make more and more qualifications as to why their dragon, or deity, cannot be evidenced who make the snags to fit. Or those who tell us that the deity can do anything except, it seems, show itself unambiguously.

I understand what you're saying, but you seem to be having some trouble understanding why the dragon story isn't a valid analogy. I'll try once more, a bit more simplified:

Carl didn't know the dragon was invisible because Rick "neglected to mention" that, so Carl asked to see it.

The title of this thread does not neglect to mention that "God can do anything," and yet some still ask if there's something he can't do, while others are outright saying he can't do some things, such as putting thought into action without time.

It wouldn't be unreasonable to question the comprehension of someone who asks to see something described as invisible. (Note how Carl stopped asking to see it when he was told that the dragon couldn't be seen.) Likewise, it wouldn't be unreasonable to question the comprehension of someone asking if there's something that God (described as being able to do anything) can't do.

I never said, nor even implied, that such a being can be. It is presumed in the title of this thread for the sake of discussion. You are told this upfront because the OP, unlike Rick, did not neglect to mention it.

If you could be a werewolf or a vampire, which would you be? Let me guess. That question is to be dismissed in favor of an argument about the existence of vampires and werewolves during which you will accuse me of merely saying that werewolves and vampires can be and so there they are.