Thursday, August 18, 2011

Andrew the Atheist asks about really big stones.

Here's one for the believers.  Don't get frightened.  This is going to be easy.  I'm keeping with the had-this-conversation-a-thousand-times-gonna-have-it-one-more-time theme we have going here.  So you've all heard this before, and I just want to make you all repeat the same old answer again.  Here goes:

The argument against omnipotence:

Can god make a rock so bid even he can't lift it?  Can he make a cup of coffee so hot even he can't sip it?  Can he make a woman so hot even he can't resist her?

I've heard all kinds of explanations for this.  What's yours?


  1. Seriously? Are you going to make me pull your finger next?

  2. Since there is no God the answer to all three is No!

  3. Talk about silly. First of all, everything you mentioned is in the material world, therefore the answer is yes to all of them. A Rock can only be as big as the universe, A cup of coffee can only be as hot as the amount of energy in the universe, God does not have earthly desires. (This actually shows how little you know about the nature of God).

    Since God himself hold the universe in place. These are very silly statements. But even better yet, you'll be shocked to hear that God can't make a square circle or even tell you if Wednesday is Blue. He can't lie either.

    What is the point of this anyway?

  4. Athanasius, how is this question MORE silly than the I-don't-know-how-the-universe-began-so-I-am-justified-in-believing-a-god-started-it-all argument?

    BOTH are equally ridiculous. Since I repressed my frustration and actually answered the question, I expect the same here.

  5. If you can't see the difference between the position, then I don't know what to say. You provide dumb statements.

    For example, you believe in evolution because you look at some evidence and decide it is real. We do the same, we see the universe having a beginning, we see time as having a beginning, we see matter having a beginning. We do not arbitrarily think God did it, or the Spaghetti Monster for that matter, we have documents that claim this occurrence and we see that reality seems to concur with this evidence, we therefore deduce the possibility of the existence of God.

    You can mention it is the Spaghetti monster or the pink unicorn as many of you like to mention, but what evidence at all is there for these "things". We have actual sources and documentation for the God.

    There is a big difference in the premises. You claim there is no God. How do you know there is no God?