The high master
Member
A. Omnipotent has the power of chose it can chose to do it
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
i dont understand this omnipotent
- Thread starter The high master
- Start date
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
Perhaps the omnipotence of the God described in Titus 1v2 is so constrained, however that does not mean that all types of omnipotence is constrained in the same manner - we are not limited to discussion of one God or the arbitrary characteristics associated with that God.
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
lol
Basically all people who hold faith yet suggest rationality, evidence or logic are incapable of being reliably applied to such an entity are those who are relying on fideism, it is an argument which suggests that faith is supported through experience and that is enough - logical rules, rational explanations and common understanding does not matter in the face of that. If Jesus felt that his belief transcended any possible rational attempt at understanding then that would be a strong indicator that he was Fideistic.
((Personally I do not hold a Fideistic position but rather use it to 'temper' Ignosticism with its focus on definitions and falsification into a form congenial to the discussion of poorly defined and unfalsifiable concepts - as well as supporting my extremely abstract, minimalist positions particularly on things like time))
Basically all people who hold faith yet suggest rationality, evidence or logic are incapable of being reliably applied to such an entity are those who are relying on fideism, it is an argument which suggests that faith is supported through experience and that is enough - logical rules, rational explanations and common understanding does not matter in the face of that. If Jesus felt that his belief transcended any possible rational attempt at understanding then that would be a strong indicator that he was Fideistic.
((Personally I do not hold a Fideistic position but rather use it to 'temper' Ignosticism with its focus on definitions and falsification into a form congenial to the discussion of poorly defined and unfalsifiable concepts - as well as supporting my extremely abstract, minimalist positions particularly on things like time))
Last edited:
The high master
Member
Omnipotent means to have no limits to what it can do
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
The god is not, by your presented definition, omnipotent.
Satyamavejayanti
Well-Known Member
According to Hinduism
Ishwar is able to do anything (Omnipotent) that is in accord with its own nature, omniscient & Omnipresent (thus, for instance, if Ishwar nature is that what it speaks is truth, then it is not able to lie). Ishwar is able to do anything in accordance of its nature of Omniscient.
If Ishwar lies then its omnipotence and omniscient comes into question.
The high master
Member
Why do people have the need to try and put omnipotent in a Box
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
What box are people trying to put it in?
The high master
Member
The box comes in many forms like
Logic reason and sense why can't people acknowledge that omnipotent is without limit restraints it is beyond minds to understand for instance
Can a omnipotent being create a higher greater power omnipotent means no limit so yes it can if it can't then it is limited
Logic reason and sense why can't people acknowledge that omnipotent is without limit restraints it is beyond minds to understand for instance
Can a omnipotent being create a higher greater power omnipotent means no limit so yes it can if it can't then it is limited
Last edited:
Because of "x = impossible."
If God does the impossible, then it wasn't impossible, so God failed what he set out to do.
The high master
Member
So nothing is impossible for a omnipotent
The high master
Member
Omnipotent is beyond are understanding which is odd because we made the word
Certainly an omnipotent being can make himself impotent but not recommended.
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
As I have attempted (obviously poorly) to explain High Master in the PMs, it all depends on how you define omnipotence, it means different things to different people. Omnipotence at its core refers to:
"The ability to do anything it chooses to do"
To different people this will then be constrained by various restrictions, laws, the entity's nature and so forth. The first and most abstract laws are usually the restrictions put on first, these are the ones most people at least subconsciously adhere to.
For those who conform to a more secular view of existence, this is likely to be the 'logical' framework and so forth - which they consider to be absolute, immutable rules of existence (and non existence). In such a scenario, omnipotence to them then becomes a conceptualised ability which is constrained by logical rules on possible states and events.
For those who conform to a more spiritual view of existence, it is instead likely to be more about the nature of the entity as they perceive it to be (such as claims it cannot deceive), because of truths they claim to have obtained about that entity (such as because their holy book says god said he cannot lie, which they hold should be interpreted literally). In such a scenario, omnipotence to them then becomes a conceptualised ability which is constrained by explicit or implicit guidelines and rules based on these insights, though this may not necessarily (and often do not) include any logical restrictions.
Different people will add different restrictions to the concept of omnipotence in accordance with their understanding of the nature of existence. So "The ability to do anything it chooses to do" carries with it different implications; the omnipotence you refer to High Master is the most abstract form without any restrictions whether logic, natural law or assumptions about the nature of the entity.
"The ability to do anything it chooses to do"
To different people this will then be constrained by various restrictions, laws, the entity's nature and so forth. The first and most abstract laws are usually the restrictions put on first, these are the ones most people at least subconsciously adhere to.
For those who conform to a more secular view of existence, this is likely to be the 'logical' framework and so forth - which they consider to be absolute, immutable rules of existence (and non existence). In such a scenario, omnipotence to them then becomes a conceptualised ability which is constrained by logical rules on possible states and events.
For those who conform to a more spiritual view of existence, it is instead likely to be more about the nature of the entity as they perceive it to be (such as claims it cannot deceive), because of truths they claim to have obtained about that entity (such as because their holy book says god said he cannot lie, which they hold should be interpreted literally). In such a scenario, omnipotence to them then becomes a conceptualised ability which is constrained by explicit or implicit guidelines and rules based on these insights, though this may not necessarily (and often do not) include any logical restrictions.
Different people will add different restrictions to the concept of omnipotence in accordance with their understanding of the nature of existence. So "The ability to do anything it chooses to do" carries with it different implications; the omnipotence you refer to High Master is the most abstract form without any restrictions whether logic, natural law or assumptions about the nature of the entity.
Impossible is impossible, whether someone's omnipotent or not.
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
If you constrain omnipotent by logic, absolutely.
Of course omni-potency when unconstrained by logic is absurd, but that doesn't mean it can't exist - it does however mean it is not worth thinking about it.