Could their really be a God?

[Jay86]

great arguement eonbar- i have put the same unbreakable rock theory to my mum and aunt in the past and they have gone round in circles trying to make sense of it. had they said that to me they may well have won that arguement- but they didn't.

still don't believe in God.

[mcgrou]

Originally Posted by eonbar

'cannot create' is itself meaningless when used in the same sentance as God is omnipotent.

Then don't use them in the same sentence? I find "God isn't omnipotent", or "There cannot be an omnipotent God" much more meaningful.

Originally Posted by eonbar

logical impossibilities and inherant contradictions within the statement itself makes the statement meaningless.

Point these out please? That statement is kinda ambiguous.

Originally Posted by eonbar

God would no longer be omnipotent because He has a weakness, when the definition of omnipotence is not having a weakness...

Exactly

Originally Posted by eonbar

BUT have you ever that that If God can do absolutely anything, then God can remove his own omnipotence. If God can remove his own omnipotence, then God can create an unbreakable object, remove his own omnipotence, then not be able to break the object. This preserves the belief that God is omnipotent because God can create an object that He couldn't lift it. Therefore in this theory God would not be omnipotent while not being able to lift the stone. this to me seems incredibly logically permissible, in the same way that your argument was logical to you...

Scenario A: God creates unbreakable object and removes his omnipotence, in order for the object to be unbreakable. He is now no longer omnipotent.

Scenario B: He cannot make the unbreakable object and/or remove his own omnipotence, hence he was never omnipotent to begin with.

Originally Posted by eonbar

Counter argument once again i can see that your probably thinking "hang on, this doesn't really follow because if god is omnipotent than he should surely be able to defy natural laws of LOGIC etc"

Not sure what you mean. I was following perfectly and didn't think he could defy the "natural laws of logic", simply because there are no "laws of logic". Logic is a way in which people can evaluate how valid a theory is and the logic here is saying that an omnipotent God isn't hugely valid.

Originally Posted by eonbar

the two things don't need to co-exit at the same time

Key point here. What if they do need to exist at the same time?

Originally Posted by eonbar

you move sir

Check.

[eddy1982]

Hard question but will we really ever know. i think its a good thing to have faith im not religious but id like to think there is a god watching over us.

The story that everything was created from an explosion doesn't sit well with me to be honest.

[calum55]

im agnostic, honestly no one knows

[Bentohall]

yes

[Harvez]

Originally Posted by Bentohall

yes

That's a well thought out and contributing post to a debate forum