If god can do anything, can he create another god that is more powerful than him

Diety_Slapper perhaps some criticism from a fellow atheist would be more meaningful. Your argument here is basically just a rewording of the "rock God can't lift" or "taco that God can't eat" argument. It's a bad argument and I'll try to explain why.

Basically it comes down to our flawed understanding of infinity. Infinity is the largest value possible to grant to any particular attribute and as the Christians believe God has them all, infinite wisdom, infinite strength and in the case of what you have argued an infinite capacity for creation. Now God can create a being of infinite perfection yes but what you are claiming is that that being would surpass God himself. That's the weak point, you can't say "this infinitely powerful God is more powerful than this one". If that were to be true then you would have a value that was greater than infinity which as you well know is impossible. If you can come up with a value that is larger than infinity then your argument will have a foundation.

Keep thinking it out mate.

Diety_Slapper perhaps some criticism from a fellow atheist would be more meaningful. Your argument here is basically just a rewording of the rock "God can't lift" or "taco that God can't eat" argument. It's a bad argument and I'll try to explain why.

Basically it comes down to our flawed understanding of infinity. Infinity is the largest value possible to grant to any particular attribute and as the Christians believe God has them all, infinite wisdom, infinite strength and in the case of what you have argued an infinite capacity for creation. Now God can create a being of infinite perfection yes but what you are claiming is that that being would surpass God himself. That's the weak point, you can't say "this infinitely powerful God is more powerful than this one". If that were to be true then you would have a value that was greater than infinity which as you well know is impossible. If you can come up with a value that is larger than infinity then your argument will have a foundation.

Keep thinking it out mate.

domatron23

Words of wisdom!

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="leeveeu"]Even if the Big Bang created the Universe, how did those 2 atoms get there? Humans must accept that there exists an entity beyond space, time and most importantly THEIR UNDERSTANDINGleeveeu

"They have always existed" - haha you crack me up! Isn't this an assumption, a wild guess in the purest form possible???

What's the explanation?

Edit: Also, TIME has NO MEANING "before" the creation of the Universe. Duh.

[QUOTE="leeveeu"]

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="leeveeu"]Even if the Big Bang created the Universe, how did those 2 atoms get there? Humans must accept that there exists an entity beyond space, time and most importantly THEIR UNDERSTANDINGC_Town_Soul

"They have always existed" - haha you crack me up! Isn't this an assumption, a wild guess in the purest form possible???

What's the explanation?

Edit: Also, TIME has NO MEANING "before" the creation of the Universe. Duh.

If an all-powerful God exists, none us would be able to understand the scope of such a being. You can't go around using human logic, and applying your own human definitions of "power", or "powerful", or human ideas of "can", "can't", "could", "couldn't", etc. to define the being that created such laws in the first place. A God of the Christian magnitude would be far beyond any of our comprehension, and would not be bound or confined to anything we could know or conceive of.

It's best to just leave it alone, and let people believe what they want. For all the arguing, no one ever comes any closer to swaying the opposition, and all the "evidence" for both sides is completely subjective.

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="leeveeu"]

[QUOTE="C_Town_Soul"][QUOTE="leeveeu"]Even if the Big Bang created the Universe, how did those 2 atoms get there? Humans must accept that there exists an entity beyond space, time and most importantly THEIR UNDERSTANDINGlinkthewindow

"They have always existed" - haha you crack me up! Isn't this an assumption, a wild guess in the purest form possible???

What's the explanation?

Edit: Also, TIME has NO MEANING "before" the creation of the Universe. Duh.

well god created himself, thats pretty hard to beat

Gods power is infinite, our mind does not understand infinite yet.

There is nothing more than infinite, therefore there cant be more power than infinite power.

[QUOTE="gamertylers"]Here we go again...Assassinslay

Here's why god is not all powerful.

If god could create another god more powerful than himself, then the new god would have attributes that the original god didn't have, which means he obviously wasn't capable of everything to begin with.

Deity_Slapper

Perhaps God could, but would not desire to (disregarding ideas of the meaning of infinity).

And if it's impossible for god to create anything greater than himself, since he already is the utmost in power, then obviously god has limitations that he can not overcome - this would mean that there is at least one thing that god is not capable of, which effectively destroys the claim that he is all-powerful and capable of ANYTHING.

Deity_Slapper

Your assertion of the impossibility has not been proven, based on the notion of God's free choice.

And if god has at least one limitation that is visible to us, this leads me to think how many more limitations could be laying right beneath our eyes that we haven't even picked up on yet. But if god even has one flaw - just one - that's enough to make him imperfect and like humans in the way that he has a handicap that is not possible to overcome. Which raises the question -

Deity_Slapper

Even if God could not create another God, why would you call this a limitiation? God being all powerful would negate the requirement for more than one of them. Another argument would be that part of God's perfection is God's uniqueness and limitless power. Abstract concepts of God being a part of everything would also have trouble accomodating two of them.

Why worship him in the first place? Can you not tell that if we can find a flaw in the description of a supposedly perfect god, that it makes it obvious that this god was created by mankind? Only mankind could create something that would be flawed, according to the very definition of god that I've recieved from christians themselves. And if we're able to realize that god was invented by mankind - as a result of discovering a flaw within the definition of god, does this not disprove god from existing at all?

Deity_Slapper

I don't think you have found a flaw here in the definition of God. Besides, there are many definitions and interpretations of God, from many religions.

As I hope I've shown, disproof is a logical fallacy. The scientific method relies only on positive proof and has brought us huge discovery and revelations. The same framework has never created a popular hypothesis supporting the idea of God. It means that our existence can be explained without the need to substitute for God.

Every single one of you misinterpereted what I was trying to do. I was NOT trying to convert anyone. I was NOT trying to impress all the snobs who think they're smarter than anyone else. Like I care if I don't pass your little test. This is a weak arguement, but I have much better ones. (Gotta start small and work upwards. Well, at least I got your attention.)

My main intention was to plant a seed. That's it. And still so many of you people who complained about me bashing people were bashing me in turn. Why volunteer to be a hypocrite? Anyway, I don't care, mods you can lock this thread if you want. I'm done with it anyway. For any other points I want to present, I'll make a new thread.

[QUOTE="tzar3"]

Maybe I should look up Nile. They sound like an awesome band. :o

DFan17902

That you should. And that they are.

ESPECIALLY if you like Egypt.

Sweet
EVOLV3

He could create another God but only as powerfull as himself that is as long as that was within the God's ability to do so.

Test your senses.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/body/interactives/senseschallenge/

religion thread #9999999999376321634739589485983.

WRONG!

If God could ever create something better than him, it would mean he is not perfect. He could no longer be considered God. Then God cannot create someone above him.

[spoiler] That means he also has a weakness. Not being able to create someone above him, is a weakness. He isn't perfect. Whichproves that GOD DOES NOT EXIST! Cool, eh? [/spoiler]

WRONG!

If God could ever create something better than him, it would mean he is not perfect. He could no longer be considered God. Then God cannot create someone above him.

joao_22990

There are different meanings of omnipotence. There are almost no modern theologists who hold an absolute definition of omnipotence for the very reason you stated. See my post above for more info.

Interesting topic.

I'll say he can't create something more powerful than himself because, logically, a creation cannot be more powerful than the creator. So, God is all-powerful and capable of anything except to create something more powerful than himself. Yes, he has this one limitation but that's the only limitation I can think of there would be. And I don't think this one, particular limitation would make him imperfect since not having this limitation would be illogical.

Interesting topic.

I'll say he can't create something more powerful than himself because, logically, a creation cannot be more powerful than the creator. So, God is all-powerful and capable of anything except to create something more powerful than himself. Yes, he has this one limitation but that's the only limitation I can think of there would be. And I don't think this one, particular limitation would make him imperfect since not having this limitation would be illogical.

Revinh

Wow. The first intelligent response to this thread that I had almost given up on. It's sad that it took over 2 days and 9 pages for it to happen.

Interesting topic.

I'll say he can't create something more powerful than himself because, logically, a creation cannot be more powerful than the creator. So, God is all-powerful and capable of anything except to create something more powerful than himself. Yes, he has this one limitation but that's the only limitation I can think of there would be. And I don't think this one, particular limitation would make him imperfect since not having this limitation would be illogical.

Revinh

People have been creating things that are more powerful then themselves - called machines.

I'm not sure that your "logic" stands up.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

Interesting topic.

I'll say he can't create something more powerful than himself because, logically, a creation cannot be more powerful than the creator. So, God is all-powerful and capable of anything except to create something more powerful than himself. Yes, he has this one limitation but that's the only limitation I can think of there would be. And I don't think this one, particular limitation would make him imperfect since not having this limitation would be illogical.

Deity_Slapper

Wow. The first intelligent response to this thread that I had almost given up on. It's sad that it took over 2 days and 9 pages for it to happen.

I notice you completely ignored my recent post.

I think you tend to get such hostile responses is because your delivery is so demeaning to others. Why would anyone chose to think what you think if it makes you act like you do? Please don't take this as an attack, but as advice.

People have been creating things that are more powerful then themselves - called machines.

I'm not sure that your "logic" stands up.

RationalAtheist

It's impossible to create something greater than yourself. What can the machine do that man didn't enable it to do? It's not like it has a mind of it's own. Anything mankind has built can be taken apart. Our creations can only be equal to, or beneath us. A machine has to be given it's abilities, and can be altered and removed at any time.

His main point, and mine as well, is that these machines are not more advanced INTELLECTUALLY than their creators...and the mind is where everything begins.

So what's that about logic? I thought you were rational. :)

I think you tend to get such hostile responses is because your delivery is so demeaning to others. Why would anyone chose to think what you think if it makes you act like you do? Please don't take this as an attack, but as advice.

RationalAtheist

I have my style. You don't have to like it, and I'm very able to deal with whatever backlash comes from the waves I set into motion. I'm a grown man, don't worry about me. Thanks.

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

Interesting topic.

I'll say he can't create something more powerful than himself because, logically, a creation cannot be more powerful than the creator. So, God is all-powerful and capable of anything except to create something more powerful than himself. Yes, he has this one limitation but that's the only limitation I can think of there would be. And I don't think this one, particular limitation would make him imperfect since not having this limitation would be illogical.

RationalAtheist

Wow. The first intelligent response to this thread that I had almost given up on. It's sad that it took over 2 days and 9 pages for it to happen.

I notice you completely ignored my recent post.

Ha...that's funny. Like only your post is intelligent? Sorry, dude, while you may be a smart guy, and I can tell that you are, I'm still the person who gets to decide for myself what posts, words, etc. are the most inspirational, or even...rational...to me. I felt like his response was more intelligent than yours. That's my opinion, you don't have to agree.

Your first post didn't really seem to add or expand on my idea. It seems you came in, threw your weight around, and assumed the position of the mother hen, correcting every little thing about my approach that you thought was wrong. I can see your intelligence and I respect it, but don't think you're the only great mind around here. I've noticed MANY intelligent folks frequenting these forums. Many. In fact, gamespot might have the highest concentration of smarts that I've ever witnessed in an online community.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]People have been creating things that are more powerful then themselves - called machines.

I'm not sure that your "logic" stands up.

Deity_Slapper

It's impossible to create something greater than yourself. What can the machine do that man didn't enable it to do? It's not like it has a mind of it's own. Anything mankind has built can be taken apart. Our creations can only be equal to, or beneath us. A machine has to be given it's abilities, and can be altered and removed at any time.

His main point, and mine as well, is that these machines are not more advanced INTELLECTUALLY than their creators...and the mind is where everything begins.

So what's that about logic? I thought you were rational. :)

Actually, Revinh said "a creation can not be more powerful than its creator".

"More powerful" does not necessarily mean "greater". Power does not imply life.

You are bringing things into my response that I did not respond to.

You also still have not responded to my response to your post - the one just before you moan about how ignorant everyone else in the thread has been.

Why assume I'm rational? I've never thought of you as a slapper!

I'm sure god, being good, would create another being that is more "good" than him out of the desire to relinquish governance and rule to a being he recognises as more "good" and then that being would do the same and you would have a progression towards a being of absolute good.

Wasn't that one of St Thomas Aquinas' proofs for the existence of God? The concept of there being absolutes and therefore there must be an absolute good ie God.

Ha...that's funny. Like only your post is intelligent? Sorry, dude, while you may be a smart guy, and I can tell that you are, I'm still the person who gets to decide for myself what posts, words, etc. are the most inspirational, or even...rational...to me. I felt like his response was more intelligent than yours. That's my opinion, you don't have to agree.

Your first post didn't really seem to add or expand on my idea. It seems you came in, threw your weight around, and assumed the position of the mother hen, correcting every little thing about my approach that you thought was wrong. I can see your intelligence and I respect it, but don't think you're the only great mind around here. I've noticed MANY intelligent folks frequenting these forums. Many. In fact, gamespot might have the highest concentration of smarts that I've ever witnessed in an online community.

Deity_Slapper

I don't know if my post seemed intelligent to you- you never responded to it. Instead, and immediatley afterwards, you wrote about how noone understood you and that everyone here was ignorant.

All I'm doing is responding to a thread in a forum. If you see it as throwing my weight around, that's your perception. If you think I'm assuming the position of a mother hen - again, that's something that's going on in your own head.

The point of my post was not to try and sound intelligent, but to refute the assertion you made in your first post. I'm not clear whether you think this is some sort of willy waving contest, whereas, I like to discuss religion.

Actually, Revinh said "a creation can not be more powerful than its creator".

"More powerful" does not necessarily mean "greater". Power does not imply life.RationalAtheist

You are nitpicking and you know it. Do you think that's gonna fool me? You should know what he meant. This is your way of dodging the admittance of fault. "More powerful" can definately mean greater. There's many ways to interperet those words, but you're trying to make everything so black and white, stuffed into your box definitions.

You also still have not responded to my response to your post - the one just before you moan about how ignorant everyone else in the thread has been.RationalAtheist

There was nothing to respond to.

Why assume I'm rational? I've never thought of you as a slapper!

RationalAtheist

I didn't assume you were rational at all. In fact, I thnk we've already exposed a tear in that mask. I'm just going by what you called yourself. So basically, you just assumed that I assumed. ;)

My name on the other hand, is blatantly and purposely sarcastic, no one will think that I'm actually, physically slapping deities. How could I? They don't exist remember?

not if we use descartes' definition of omnipotence;)fanofazrienoch

Or Aquinas'.;)

this is one of the best questions iv ever heard.

I don't know if my post seemed intelligent to you- you never responded to it. Instead, and immediatley afterwards, you wrote about how noone understood you and that everyone here was ignorant.RationalAtheist

I never said ignorant. Now YOU'RE bringing things into the post that I never said...right after you complained about it, no less...:roll:

If I felt like no one was understanding me, then that's just how I felt. Ok? Now I have to FEEL the way you want me to as well? Holy crap.

All I'm doing is responding to a thread in a forum. If you see it as throwing my weight around, that's your perception. If you think I'm assuming the position of a mother hen - again, that's something that's going on in your own head.RationalAtheist

Might be something going on in my own head, but hey, we all have our opinions that come from our varying degrees of awareness and perception. So what's the problem? At least I can admit that I might be wrong, but it seems like humility is something you'll never be caught dead putting on display.

The point of my post was not to try and sound intelligent, but to refute the assertion you made in your first post. I'm not clear whether you think this is some sort of willy waving contest, whereas, I like to discuss religion. RationalAtheist

I'm too old for willy waving contests. I'd much rather have a mental challenge.

I'm too old for willy waving contests. I'd much rather have a mental challenge.

Deity_Slapper

Would you like to respond to the PM I sent you?

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

I'm too old for willy waving contests. I'd much rather have a mental challenge.

Dracargen

Would you like to respond to the PM I sent you?

If you post it here. Sure.

And you're right, I have nothing else to learn. Except how candlejack manages to find and kidnap anyone who says his na

CANDLE JACK?!

Oh sh-.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"] Actually, Revinh said "a creation can not be more powerful than its creator".

"More powerful" does not necessarily mean "greater". Power does not imply life.Deity_Slapper

You are nitpicking and you know it. Do you think that's gonna fool me? You should know what he meant. This is your way of dodging the admittance of fault. "More powerful" can definately mean greater. There's many ways to interperet those words, but you're trying to make everything so black and white, stuffed into your box definitions.

You also still have not responded to my response to your post - the one just before you moan about how ignorant everyone else in the thread has been.RationalAtheist

There was nothing to respond to.

Why assume I'm rational? I've never thought of you as a slapper!

RationalAtheist

I didn't assume you were rational at all. In fact, I thnk we've already exposed a tear in that mask. I'm just going by what you called yourself. So basically, you just assumed that I assumed. ;)

My name on the other hand, is blatantly and purposely sarcastic, no one will think that I'm actually, physically slapping deities. How could I? They don't exist remember?

No I'm not dodging anything. I have no idea what will fool you.

Definitions and interpretations are important tools of argument. The definitions are not in my boxes, but in shared boxes, for all to consume.

Are there more of you now, or have you strted using the "royal we"?

When you said this

So what's that about logic? I thought you were rational.

Deity_Slapper

You made the assumption.

Where I live (UK) a "slapper" is a young woman of loose virtue!

[QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

I'm too old for willy waving contests. I'd much rather have a mental challenge.

Deity_Slapper

Would you like to respond to the PM I sent you?

If you post it here. Sure.

-_-

There are two answers to your question:

Thomas Aquinas stated that God can do anything within logical reason. He can create the universe, but cannot make 2+2=5, since that's a logical impossibility. Therefore, the answer to your question is: no, since a being more powerful than God is logically impossible, God cannot make one more powerful than Him. This is the most accepted version of omnipotence.

The second answer comes from Rene Descartes. If God is omnipotent, then He can make illogical contradictions not contradict. He CAN make 2+2=5, and He CAN make a being more powerful than Him, while still being God. Sure, it's a contradiction, but so what? Since God is omnipotent, and can do anything, He can also make contradictions make logical sense.

Your argument is correct just as long as you interpret omnipotence as a static concept. Philosophers like Descartes regarded omnipotence as having multiple levels. I personally think this is an enormous cop-out since it does nothing but bring the debate into the realm of semantics but it's nonetheless a valid argument that apologetics will use. So, when it comes to this I guess us theists and non-theists will just have to agree to disagree.espoac

2nd intelligent answer of the day. Congratulations.

This is what I was looking for. Posts like this. Not just a "you're wrong". I like posts like this that are well thought out, and well written/typed. Posts like this give me something think about later, which is what I was looking for.

Where I live (UK) a "slapper" is a young woman of loose virtue!RationalAtheist

Well, I like that...

Maybe I should change my name to Slapper_Hunter.

I'm not going to argue with you though man, I respect your smarts, but damn....I don't wanna go back and forth all day.

Ok, I've been watching this one from the sidelines. And, frankly, Deity_Slapper, you need to decide what your intention for this thread is. At first, you were complaining because none of the other posts were intelligent enough, which means that you were craving a debate on the subject. Now that you have someone who is willing to mentally fence with you, you keep falling back on the fact that you are only stating your opinion on the matter. While I won't argue with your right to hold a personal opinion, such things hold little water in an actual argument, and they give the impression that you have no further reasonable points to present. In other words, either man up and address the points that people are making against you, or shut up and stop picking fights for their own sake.thnickaman13

See now posts like this are what make no sense to me. It's a, "I'm right and you're stupid" kind of post. The tone is completely condescending. "I was watching from the sidelines", as if you were waiting for the right moment to strike and infuse this thread with your genius.

Then you tell me to shut up and stop picking fights, when, not only have I not been picking fights (check my disclaimer), but the very words you used here could be seen as fighting words! How ridicuolously ironic and hypocritical. If you read the entire thread, it should become apparent that I never picked a fight, only defended myself against posts such as these. Posts like yours incite the fight, then you point the finger at me? Why? Are you upset that I actually stand up for myself, and won't let you walk all over me?

[QUOTE="espoac"]Your argument is correct just as long as you interpret omnipotence as a static concept. Philosophers like Descartes regarded omnipotence as having multiple levels. I personally think this is an enormous cop-out since it does nothing but bring the debate into the realm of semantics but it's nonetheless a valid argument that apologetics will use. So, when it comes to this I guess us theists and non-theists will just have to agree to disagree.Deity_Slapper

2nd intelligent answer of the day. Congratulations.

This is what I was looking for. Posts like this. Not just a "you're wrong". I like posts like this that are well thought out, and well written/typed. Posts like this give me something think about later, which is what I was looking for.