-
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!
Search results
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...On this we can fully agree! -Darryl- Darryl Lankford
- Post #122
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...The Stone Paradox represents a legitimate challenge to omnipotence based on its simplicity. It doesn't require God to do something already deemed illogical (make 2 * 2 = 5 or make a square circle) require God to do something stupid (mkae a prison to which He cannot escape) or require Him to...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #120
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...This is not necessarily true. The attributes associated with omnipotence supports a conversion of logic that would allow for an "Act" and "Non Act" to happen simultaneously. This is demonstrated in my Circular God Counter-paradox solution to the Stone Paradox. The limitations of logic...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #110
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...I have become extremely amused at the back-and-forth on whether or not an "omnipotent being" (God) can exist. It's interesting how each of you involved in the discussion are debating if an omnipotent being can have "conflicting wills" or is able to "thwart his own will." Then you go on to...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #105
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...This is simply not true. I have clearly demonstrated how an omnipotent being can have conflicting desires (I.e, "Create a rock that He cannot lift" -and- "Never compromise omnipotence"). If a very basic example can be provided that demonstrates how both of these "conflicting desires" can...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #98
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...And as I clearly stated in my response, God has thwarted and not thwarted His own will at the exact same moment. An omnipotent being is able to do so and I have clearly demonstrated how this task can be achieved. ...Again, if God's will is to create a rock that He cannot lift, then He has...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #90
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...If I haven't resolved anything, then you should have no trouble at all in demonstrating how I haven't, right? Furthermore, since these "specifically-designed" omnipotence paradox questions can be neutralized by way of a "specifically-designed" counter-paradoxical response, then it is a valid...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #84
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...The topic is "Can God create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" I have supplied an answer that fully resolves the question and to which nobody seems to be able to demonstrate a flaw. ...Based on the thread topic, how is this not considered "reasonable discussion" in your mind...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #82
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...Uhhh, in case you're not keeping up on current events, here are your words as quoted:- Darryl Lankford
- Post #79
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...But if God is able to use the powers associated with omnipotence to lift the stone and not lift the stone at the exact same paradoxical moment, then the point of the "thought exercise" has not been missed at all. In fact, it becomes a knockout punch to the Stone Paradox by way of God's...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #76
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
Okay, so 9-10ths_Penguin, Thief and Mestemia have officially tapped out. Here's the breakdown: Thief's final input is a curious response parsed with strangely disjointed sentence structure reminiscent of a haiku. 9-10ths_Penguin's final assessment is that a fully-functional...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #74
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...Absolutely meaningless. First off, I want to help you understand the difference between a baseless statement and a statement with a basis: BASELESS VS BASIS - EXAMPLE #1: Einstein: "The curvature of space-time is directly determined by the distribution of matter and energy contained...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #70
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...You cannot simply state this without providing proof / support of your claim. Since the Circular God Counter-paradox now exists, YOU now become the one who is required to demonstrate where it has failed to meet the requirements stated in the Stone Paradox. ...No alterations to the Stone...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #66
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...God's desiring that His creations possess free will while also desiring they submit to His will could be considered "conflicting desires." Whether this is logical is arguable. Spiritual logic says that it is. Pure logic would say that it is not. It is "spiritually logical" that free will...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #63
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
Update: Okay, so 9-10ths_Penguin and Thief have both tapped out. Thief's final input is a curious response parsed with strangely-disjointed sentence structure reminiscent of a haiku. Penguin's final assessment is that a fully-functional counter-paradoxical resolution to the "Paradox of the...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #58
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...That's wonderful news, Penguin! Unfortunately I don't care "how" or "why" it was designed. All that is required out of me is an "answer." The Circular God Counter-paradox delivers the required answer no matter how or why it was designed. ...The fact stands right now that the Paradox of...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #56
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...What is insufficient is your response to the Circular God Counter-paradox. A quick, snippy-little "sour grapes" comeback does not adequately demonstrate how this counter-paradox has failed to meet the challenge. Your argument serves as nothing more than an emotional reaction based on...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #53
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...Just so we have a clear understanding, you are not arguing that the Circular God Counter-paradox has not adequately resolved the Stone Paradox question nor have you found a flaw nested in the response, correct? ...This is a very creative, imaginative and personal understanding you have of...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #47
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
...The Circular God Counter-paradox is far more than "sufficient.". It goes much farther in its ability to nullify the Stone Paradox question in the process. However, if you feel this counter-paradoxical response does not directly answer the Stone Paradox question or is in some way flawed...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #45
- Forum: Theological Concepts
-
Answer to Paradox of Stone
There is a solution to the "Paradox of the Stone" which utilizes the powers associated with omnipotence to nullify the question. It's called the "Circular God Counter-paradox." The effect of this response creates a unique situation where anyone asking the stone paradox question becomes trapped...- Darryl Lankford
- Post #43
- Forum: Theological Concepts