God's omipotennts

[Yesusfriend]

Continuing of "What happens if you have two postulates that can’t coexist?" conversation on omnipotence.

Can we move this conversation here and leave the other thread to morality at this point in time it is less messy that way. One topic in each place.

thanks

Your friendly Yesusfriend

[Another brick in the wall]

OK, I agree with your new definition. So how can god turn water into wine without violating logic?

[miata]

Tesla Weapons,
Google this and find out who has the power and it's not a GOD.

[Yesusfriend]

Changing matter is not violating logic

We can even do some of that now. All God would have to do would be to move the particles around a bang (-the bang) it would be wine (I guess He might have had to grab some particles from the shrouding area but that could not be to hard). Or he could have just uncreated the water and recreated a bunch of wine molecules in the jar.

[miata]

Changing matter is not violating logic

We can even do some of that now. All God would have to do would be to move the particles around a bang (-the bang) it would be wine (I guess He might have had to grab some particles from the shrouding area but that could not be to hard). Or he could have just uncreated the water and recreated a bunch of wine molecules in the jar.
Man I never looked at it that way.

[Baphomet]

Yesusfriend wrote:

Changing matter is not violating logic

We can even do some of that now. All God would have to do would be to move the particles around a bang (-the bang) it would be wine (I guess He might have had to grab some particles from the shrouding area but that could not be to hard). Or he could have just uncreated the water and recreated a bunch of wine molecules in the jar.
Ah, yes, changing matter is does not defy logic, provided there is actually a cause that initiates a chemical reaction...

using that argument I could say "moving things is not violating logic" and could therefore say that I'm telekinetic. But it doesn't work that way. When what should really be said is "moving things by applying force does not violate logic".

Likewise changing matter does not violate logic, but only if chemical reactions are taking place. Matter changing for no reason (or because someone wants it to) makes no sense. It is illogical.

[Yesusfriend]

The idea is Jesus/God caused a chemical reaction. Why can’t you handle this it is not that hard to grasp?

I never said God must fallow our logic. God is not locked into our logic he can do things we a humans can't even understand let alone do, if he could not would he be God.

What I did say was God can not violate what he says or decides.

[GodlessHeathen]

God is impotent?!??!!

[Yesusfriend]

God is impotent?!??!!
O, why do you say that?

[Sternwallow]

"God can not violate what he says or decides"
He could if He was both omnipotent and could supersede logic. That is universal logic, not human logic.
Otherwise He has limitations that render Him non-omnipotent, but not impotent (note Jesus offspring of His casual dalliance).
Slightly off topic, but, there were likely thousands of attempts by God to mate with human women in the days following Noah. There is no apparent reason to condemn all of those generations to be without the savior so God was probably trying all of the virgins available. Apparently all of the girls who came home preggers and said that God didit were aborted or killed by their father/husband/boyfriend. So a single viable birth (Jesus) out of upwards of conservatively twenty thousand or so holy copulations might be considered impotent after all.

[Baphomet]

Yesus friend wrote:
The idea is Jesus/God caused a chemical reaction. Why can’t you handle this it is not that hard to grasp?

I never said God must fallow our logic. God is not locked into our logic he can do things we a humans can't even understand let alone do, if he could not would he be God.

What I did say was God can not violate what he says or decides.
Why is it so hard to grasp. It's like me telling you that I moved a car with my mind telekinetically. You could say that's impossible. But if I were to use the same approach that your doing, I could say "No, people move cars all the time, is that so hard to grasp?"
Yes, people move cars, but they do so by natural laws, by driving them. It's the method of moving that isn't real in this case.

Likewise, yes, chemical reactions do occur. However, it's the method that is not correct or logical. Simply willing water to change to wine does nothing, there is no cause nor is there any reason for the molecules in the water to turn into wine.

[miata]

I wish Christians would try some medication and see if anything works.

[Sternwallow]

Changing water into wine is not just a chemical reaction, it is mostly nuclear. The strong nuclear force must be broken in order to make one group of nuclei transmogrify into another just as two hydrogen are required to fuse into one helium. Even so, this change trick is more believable than the de-create/re-create ploy. It has the added advantage that the resulting wine is highly radioactive thus shrinking the church attendance.

[Yesusfriend]

Radiation could also be moved away if needed. but if God is "God the creator" that we are talking about the de-create/re-create would be just as easy.

[Sternwallow]

Radiation could also be moved away if needed. but if God is "God the creator" that we are talking about the de-create/re-create would be just as easy.
Not by natural laws, it wouldn't. It would still require miracles and we know from Genesis that different caliber miracle tasks require different amounts of effort. Creation obviously is labor intensive while exercising nuclear fusion and fission are much easier.
Anyway, I have a revelation superseding yours, that God is unable to destroy things outright. If He could, then that would be an appropriate ending instead of hell for those who neither know Him nor sin.

[Choobus]

God is impotent?!??!!
here is proof that god is not impotent

http://ravingatheist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2048&action=new

[Yesusfriend]

Creation obviously is labor intensive while exercising nuclear fusion and fission are much easier.
Could be, but if God took 1000000 or so years to create life on earth and get to the place where he decided to “rest.” then why do you think some wine creating for 30 minuets would drain him.

And we don’t know that God rested because he was tired or even board. All we know is that he did not want or need to create anything else so he rested.

[Choobus]

we do know that god didn't do jack shit because he is a made up waste of time perpetuated by sad fucks who are too scared to face the cold reality of life and need a sky daddy to give them a cuddle and tell them that everything will be ok after they are dead.

Assclown

[Mog]

Now an interesting hypothetical question along these lines would be that if god kept the sabbath... would there be some scientific evidence of his taking a day off every seven days?

[Yesusfriend]

we do know that god didn't do jack shit because he is a made up waste of time perpetuated by sad fucks who are too scared to face the cold reality of life and need a sky daddy to give them a cuddle and tell them that everything will be ok after they are dead.

Assclown
are you scared of God.

[Yesusfriend]

Now an interesting hypothetical question along these lines would be that if god kept the sabbath... would there be some scientific evidence of his taking a day off every seven days?
God does not live by our days so who knows.

[Choobus]

we do know that god didn't do jack shit because he is a made up waste of time perpetuated by sad fucks who are too scared to face the cold reality of life and need a sky daddy to give them a cuddle and tell them that everything will be ok after they are dead.

Assclown
are you scared of God.
why should I be scared of God? I'm no more scared of god than I am of freddy kruger. I am scared of the moronic followers of a false god who wish to define reality for other, more sensible people in the world.

Are you scared of the truth?


Are you scared of anal?

[Yesusfriend]

we do know that god didn't do jack shit because he is a made up waste of time perpetuated by sad fucks who are too scared to face the cold reality of life and need a sky daddy to give them a cuddle and tell them that everything will be ok after they are dead.

Assclown
are you scared of God.
why should I be scared of God? I'm no more scared of god than I am of freddy kruger. I am scared of the moronic followers of a false god who wish to define reality for other, more sensible people in the world.

Are you scared of the truth?


Are you scared of anal?
no

[Choobus]

IS that because you get asfucked every night?

[Yesusfriend]

IS that because you get asfucked every night?
No, As long as you keep your sexual actions inside marriage (man and women) then I think it is fine.

[Choobus]

what about gay marriage? Two married men fucking each other deep where the sun don't shine? You down with that?

[Yesusfriend]

what about gay marriage? Two married men fucking each other deep where the sun don't shine? You down with that?
That would be wrong in my opinion.

[Choobus]

why?

[Yesusfriend]

Becaus and only becaus i think God(who you say does not exist) said so.

[Choobus]

Did god tell you himself?

[Yesusfriend]

Did god tell you himself?
He does not need to. But in a way yes (through his word).

[Sternwallow]

He does not need to. But in a way yes (through his word).
How can this be? God told me that the words to which you refer are not his, never were, and that those who wrote them are burning forever.

[Yesusfriend]

He does not need to. But in a way yes (through his word).
How can this be? God told me that the words to which you refer are not his, never were, and that those who wrote them are burning forever.
That my friend is why God uses the bible and does not speak to vary many people.(so people can't say that)

[Sternwallow]

That my friend is why God uses the bible and does not speak to vary(sic) many people.(so people can't say that)
Well, my friend, God does speak to some people otherwise we could have no idea what the text really means. That said, I reiterate " God told me that the words to which you refer are not his, never were, and that those who wrote them are burning forever." You have no way whatsoever to refute my statement.

[ghoulslime]

That my friend is why God uses the bible and does not speak to vary(sic) many people.(so people can't say that)
Well, my friend, God does speak to some people otherwise we could have no idea what the text really means. That said, I reiterate " God told me that the words to which you refer are not his, never were, and that those who wrote them are burning forever." You have no way whatsoever to refute my statement.
God told me the same thing! I witness that what you say is true. I swear this on God's holy name. Blessed be His name!

[Yesusfriend]

That my friend is why God uses the bible and does not speak to vary(sic) many people.(so people can't say that)
Well, my friend, God does speak to some people otherwise we could have no idea what the text really means. That said, I reiterate " God told me that the words to which you refer are not his, never were, and that those who wrote them are burning forever." You have no way whatsoever to refute my statement.
Usually God does not talk to people that way it is almost always threw the bible.
If I am to believe you then you will have to prove that what you say does not violate what has already been written. (That is the test)
How did God tell you this and what exactly did he say?

[Baphomet]

If the bible is god's word, god must be telling everyone different things....
that's why there are so many denominations of christianity that can't agree on scripture...
god did a really bad job of conveying his word...

But then again, he didn't write it. Most of it was from a bunch of rag-heads from the bronze age...

[Yesusfriend]

There is one church and only one church

What does this have to do with omnipotence?

[Sternwallow]

Usually God does not talk to people that way it is almost always threw(sic) the bible.
If I am to believe you then you will have to prove that what you say does not violate what has already been written. (That is the test)
How did God tell you this and what exactly did he say?
As you say, usually God does not talk that way. So sometimes He does and this is one of them. Certainly what I say does violate what has already been written, it is a new revelation. Note that the NT violates the OT at every turn while the OT violates the Summerian texts and so on for every holy document. We can only imagine the very first holy writ but it surely violated some older oral tradition. The status quo is not “the test” and never has been for newly found truths about God.

I do not expect you to believe me any more than I would have expected you to believe the visions and miracles reported in your ancient compendium of rumor and hearsay. I am not trying to facilitate your passage to heaven any more than you are trying to help mine or ours. I merely state the raw naked truth and you are supposed to accept it without proof even if you don't believe it.

God laid a burden on my soul like a bolt from the blue one afternoon as I was walking along a country road on my way to Hoboken in the annual Walkathon. The power of God's presence took my breath quite away, much as a passing diesel bus exhaust would. My companions, the multitude of either 40 or 4000 (both are true) heard God's voice or they didn't (both are true). As I lay on the grassy roadside God spoke plainly in a voice that rumbled like the thunder of a thousand storms saying "Thou art my chosen spokesperson. Thy days will be long in the Earth. The Bible is a large crock. Its authors, control freaks, all, shall forever feed on each other in the oblong pit I prepared for them at the dawn of time. Pass it on.” No, actually, I heard God as a tiny mouse-like voice in my head similar to the ringing you get from standing too close to an M-80. He said “My creation, placeth not thy faith in words on paper for they often lie, being wrought by sometimes evil and always sloppy human individuals. Those who long ago lied and called the fruit thereof ‘The Holy Bible’ for the purpose of controlling their fellow man are in great, but unspecified, torment of a high temperature nature. Tell these things to any seeker of truth.”

You have no way whatsoever to refute my statements and yet you must do so or else I claim your religion is without merit.

[Ickybod]

Do you believe god told Bush to go to war?

[Sternwallow]

Do you believe god told Bush to go to war?
Of course not. That would be impossibly stupid. Why do you ask?

[Yesusfriend]

Usually God does not talk to people that way it is almost always threw(sic) the bible.
If I am to believe you then you will have to prove that what you say does not violate what has already been written. (That is the test)
How did God tell you this and what exactly did he say?
As you say, usually God does not talk that way. So sometimes He does and this is one of them. Certainly what I say does violate what has already been written, it is a new revelation. Note that the NT violates the OT at every turn while the OT violates the Summerian texts and so on for every holy document. We can only imagine the very first holy writ but it surely violated some older oral tradition. The status quo is not “the test” and never has been for newly found truths about God.

I do not expect you to believe me any more than I would have expected you to believe the visions and miracles reported in your ancient compendium of rumor and hearsay. I am not trying to facilitate your passage to heaven any more than you are trying to help mine or ours. I merely state the raw naked truth and you are supposed to accept it without proof even if you don't believe it.

God laid a burden on my soul like a bolt from the blue one afternoon as I was walking along a country road on my way to Hoboken in the annual Walkathon. The power of God's presence took my breath quite away, much as a passing diesel bus exhaust would. My companions, the multitude of either 40 or 4000 (both are true) heard God's voice or they didn't (both are true). As I lay on the grassy roadside God spoke plainly in a voice that rumbled like the thunder of a thousand storms saying "Thou art my chosen spokesperson. Thy days will be long in the Earth. The Bible is a large crock. Its authors, control freaks, all, shall forever feed on each other in the oblong pit I prepared for them at the dawn of time. Pass it on.” No, actually, I heard God as a tiny mouse-like voice in my head similar to the ringing you get from standing too close to an M-80. He said “My creation, placeth not thy faith in words on paper for they often lie, being wrought by sometimes evil and always sloppy human individuals. Those who long ago lied and called the fruit thereof ‘The Holy Bible’ for the purpose of controlling their fellow man are in great, but unspecified, torment of a high temperature nature. Tell these things to any seeker of truth.”

You have no way whatsoever to refute my statements and yet you must do so or else I claim your religion is without merit.
OK your just plain wrong, the NT fails that OT it does not contradict or violate it.

Something may have said all that to you but it was not God because it violate what has already been said.

[Baphomet]

Yesusfriend wrote:

There is one church and only one church

What does this have to do with omnipotence?
No, there are many, many denominations of christianity. There is not "just one church". Ever heard of the slaughtering that occured in ireland, you know, the war between the "catholics and protestants", both being forms of christianity.

What does it have to do with omnipotence?
Well for one thing, if god is so powerful, why can't he keep his bloody church together. And secondly, why does he use the bible to communicate with us? Think about it, if he's allpowerful, why use a book?
Some people will never see a bible in their entire life. Other's won't ever even hear of one. Why can't he just talk to us directly?

[Baphomet]

Yesusfriend wrote:

OK your just plain wrong, the NT fails that OT it does not contradict or violate it.

Something may have said all that to you but it was not God because it violate what has already been said.
The bible has many contradictions in it. Look it up. I will admit some contraditions are actually just taken out of context, but make sense when you read further. However, there are many contradictions that cannot be explained. Don't ask me to list them here. There are way too many.

You are correct in saying that the OT is not violated by the NT. In fact, that is why certain laws in the old testament are still in effect. For one, homsexuality is bad, you cannot eat shrimp, and it is a sin to wear clothes of two different materials.
The only laws of the OT that are no longer valid are the laws concerning sacrifice, as jesus was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice. However, all the old laws are still valid. jesus himself said so "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfil them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth dissapear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by by any means disapear from the law."
( Mathew 5:17 )

So what about it? Does your church teach homosexuality is wrong? If so, they had better be denouncing shrimp eating, and wearing clothes made of two different fabrics.

[Philboid Studge]

So what about it? Does your church teach homosexuality is wrong? If so, they had better be denouncing shrimp eating, and wearing clothes made of two different fabrics.
The church could kill three birds with one stone if it wanted to. Thou shalt not be a crustacean-eatin', multi-cloth wearin' queer.

[Sternwallow]

Something may have said all that to you but it was not God because it violate what has already been said.
He who spoke to me was surely God because His was the voice of God. Naturally a new revelation, like NT canceling the OT dietary laws or (incredibly) moving the Sabbath itself, changes, invalidates or contradicts "what has already been said". Obviously, noting the OT/NT changes, God can put in another quarter, so to speak, and start a new game. He did it with the original creation, the flood and with the resurrection. Now, through me, He has yet again tilted the playing field with the message that the Bible should no longer be venerated as His word and shouldn't have been so in the past either. I personally take His mighty message to mean that all preachers, ministers, missionaries and such should switch to teaching science and critical thinking or else burn in Hell forever. He wasn't explicit on that point though.

OK your(sic) just plain wrong, the NT fails that OT it does not contradict or violate it.
This fails to be a coherent sentence, but I'll guess, through the grace of God of this new revelation, that you simply assert that the NT does not contradict the OT. The list of discrepancies within the NT and the list in the OT plus the list where the NT contradicts the OT run into thousands, You can deduce the size of these lists by reading books by biblical apologists who attempt to explain them away. Just one example is the several OT texts referenced in the NT that simply do not exist.

Remember that, if even one item in the bible is incorrect or contradictory, it is not perfect and, if not perfect, cannot be the word of God and therefore should not be venerated nor trusted for any purpose.

So, you are (you're) just plain wrong, only God could have spoken to me in that way and He called the authors of the Bible crazy or frauds or honestly, but completely mistaken. He promised appropriate punishment for the damage they have inflicted on already suffering mankind.