Can God create a rock so big that he cannot lift it?

[otseng]

This question and other similar ones have been brought up, so I'm going to create a topic to address it.

This question has some other variations:
Could God create a universe in which He never has existed?
Is God almighty enough to do anything He wants including acts that violate his own character?
Can God create another God that is superior to himself?
Can God make a triangle that is round?

The atheists state that since God cannot do these things, therefore God is not all powerful and cannot exist.

However, the problem is not a lack of answers, but the validity of the questions. By asking a question that is inherently impossible, a valid answer cannot be reached. By starting off with an illogical question, you cannot deduce any logical conclusions.

Omnipotence is not the fact that he can do anything (including defying truths) but that he is all powerful within the limits of truth.

[pl55]

That's God blessing the serpent with a predatory advantage right after disobeying him, which does not make sense.

How do you know this? Was the serpent better off, the same, or in a worse position before the curse?

Remember also that there are also several different species of water snake.

I am curious to know(because I am not an expert on water snakes),out of all the water snakes in the world- how many are water breathing?

[Corvus]

That's God blessing the serpent with a predatory advantage right after disobeying him, which does not make sense.

How do you know this? Was the serpent better off, the same, or in a worse position before the curse?

I doubt it could be better off. A snake's tongue-scent is almost as good as the scent of a dog. I was watching a documentary on this only a few nights back. I watched as one particular species bit a kind of rodent, injected its vemon, and then let it go, knowing it won't get far and that it couldn't possibly hide from it. After a while it slithered after its prey, using its tongue to smell where it went and using its stomach to feel for the minute traces of heat left by the rodent's little paws. Snakes are efficient killers with few predators.

Are you saying that God, as well as forcing the snake to "eat dust", took away its normal scent and retarded its sight? If this were a part of the curse, God would have mentioned this instead of "eating dust".

Remember also that there are also several different species of water snake.

I am curious to know(because I am not an expert on water snakes),out of all the water snakes in the world- how many are water breathing?

None. Some water snakes, mainly freshwater kinds, are "dust eaters" because they lie on the earth and bask in the sun. Most sea snakes don't come into contact with land, however, and amazingly enough, deliver live young. Yes, these could have micro-evolved to escape the biblical flood, but they are still evading the curse of dust-eating. They surface now and again to take air and then dive. They can stay submerged for hours, and are able to dissolve water in order to extract small amounts of air. I believe - someone correct me if I am wrong - that their tongues still flicker in water, receiving scent information.

Perhaps we should get back to the topic for debate. If you would like to discuss what little I know about snakes, you may private message me.

[pl55]

I doubt it could be better off.

But you do not know, do you?

Are you saying that God, as well as forcing the snake to "eat dust", took away its normal scent and retarded its sight?

No, I didn't say this, you did.

Perhaps we should get back to the topic for debate. If you would like to discuss what little I know about snakes, you may private message me.

Thank you, Corvus, but if you knew me, you'd know that I am shy .Besides I am still on the topic,your talking about snakes eating things and diving under water. I merely submitted an article for support to my argument .

[pl55]

I doubt it could be better off.

But you do not know, do you?

Are you saying that God, as well as forcing the snake to "eat dust", took away its normal scent and retarded its sight?

No, I didn't say this, you did.

Perhaps we should get back to the topic for debate. If you would like to discuss what little I know about snakes, you may private message me.

Thank you, Corvus, but if you knew me, you'd know that I am shy .Besides I am still on the topic,your talking about snakes eating things and diving under water. I merely submitted an article for support to my argument .

I wrote and posted this very late last night when I was extremely tired. I was thinking about this when I got up this morning, so I came back for a another look. And upon closer inspection of this posts' comments, as well as the ones prior to it, I feel obligated to say some things about it.

First, about this:

Are you saying that God, as well as forcing the snake to "eat dust", took away its normal scent and retarded its sight?

No, I didn't say this, you did.

I was only referring to the second half of the statement where it said " took away its normal scent and retarded its sight "

Second:

Perhaps we should get back to the topic for debate. If you would like to discuss what little I know about snakes, you may private message me.

Thank you, Corvus, but if you knew me, you'd know that I am shy .Besides I am still on the topic,your talking about snakes eating things and diving under water. I merely submitted an article for support to my argument .

I have gone back to my original post in this thread, read through until I got back here to this point. I have also read the rules concerning 'topic for debate'. I have no choice but to apologize to everyone for wandering into another subject: bible inerrancy. I am new to debate, and must learn as I go.
Therefore, I apologize, and thank you, Corvus for pointing it out.

[littlesoul]

Yes, God can create a rock so big that He cannot lift it, but then He will lift it anyway.

[macknificent]

Gentlemen, you need training in logic. It may be fun to define strawmen and then destroy them but it commits several errors in logic. This is what is known as sophistry. Stop being impressed with your postings on these boards and start studying real argument methodologies.

[Corvus]

Gentlemen, you need training in logic. It may be fun to define strawmen and then destroy them but it commits several errors in logic. This is what is known as sophistry. Stop being impressed with your postings on these boards and start studying real argument methodologies.

Welcome Macknificent.

Debate rules are given here: http://www.debatingchristianity.com/for ... ic.php?t=6

Instead of offering a general criticism of anyone or everyone as your very first post without even referring to the topic to debate, which will impact negatively on the regard members hold for you in the future, perhaps you could make your own convincing argument or response to the questions raised in this thread. Perhaps you could give us an example of a real argument methodology yourself, instead of resorting to condescending attacks?

[mystic]

Gentlemen, you need training in logic. It may be fun to define strawmen and then destroy them but it commits several errors in logic. This is what is known as sophistry. Stop being impressed with your postings on these boards and start studying real argument methodologies.

Welcome Macknificent.

Debate rules are given here: http://www.debatingchristianity.com/for ... ic.php?t=6

Instead of offering a general criticism of anyone or everyone as your very first post without even referring to the topic to debate, which will impact negatively on the regard members hold for you in the future, perhaps you could make your own convincing argument or response to the questions

raised in this thread. Perhaps you could give us an example of a real
argument methodology yourself, instead of resorting to condescending attacks?

Dear Corvus,

I couldn't agree with you more.
( ...for a ninteen year old, man, you not only think from all angles, you can put it in writing just as well). I think you couldn't have been more fair.

I'm sorrry Magknificent,

You can't turn off a fire with hot air.

mystic

[Hannibal]

Instead of offering a general criticism of anyone or everyone as your very first post without even referring to the topic to debate, which will impact negatively on the regard members hold for you in the future, perhaps you could make your own convincing argument or response to the questions raised in this thread. Perhaps you could give us an example of a real argument methodology yourself, instead of resorting to condescending attacks?

this was well said.

As for the question at hand, the christian god would be above logic and contradictions (alogical) so there is no problem here.

The problem is for believers in this god: they are unable to make logical or reasonable statements about such a being

[joku]

This question and other similar ones have been brought up, so I'm going to create a topic to address it.

This question has some other variations:
Could God create a universe in which He never has existed?
Is God almighty enough to do anything He wants including acts that violate his own character?
Can God create another God that is superior to himself?
Can God make a triangle that is round?

The atheists state that since God cannot do these things, therefore God is not all powerful and cannot exist.

However, the problem is not a lack of answers, but the validity of the questions. By asking a question that is inherently impossible, a valid answer cannot be reached. By starting off with an illogical question, you cannot deduce any logical conclusions.

Omnipotence is not the fact that he can do anything (including defying truths) but that he is all powerful within the limits of truth.

Another thing that God is unable to do is violate something that He said. For example if He said "Tomorrow the sun wont rise" then he would have to stop the sun from rising because He is bound by His Word, He is the most Honest and Holy Being that exists.