<WJhonson(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:c60.4955af03.3794c777@aol.com...
Your belief in something however does not effect
it's own existence.
However I have a new twist on this old issue.
Given: God can do anything
Assume: God creates an object which "can do more things than God"
Explain: Why this fallacy is a logical violation.
In the same move, he makes himself not omnipotent.
If god created an uncrushable stone, he would in the same motion make
himself not omnipotent.
No contradiction is here. So, I could ask "Would God be dumb enough to
create an uncrushable stone?".
Second new twist
Given: God can create anything
Assume: God creates an object having some property which makes God not be
able to do something or other to it. "An immovable object", "An
uncrushable
stone", etc
Explain: Why God cannot simply change this property and *then* affect the
object.
He would be a self-contradictory being, outside the bounds of logic. Note
that he is doing two things. One is that he is creating something that he
cannot do, and then contradicting himself by proving himself incapable of
the first act. For omnipotence to mean "able to do any combination of
things" is for omnipotence to be a self-contradictory word.