Replies

That's got nothing to do with His perfection. The argument used on me constantly at work actually went *If God can do anything He wants, can He make a rock to big for Himslef to lift?* But the argument is based on a incorrect assumption; that is, that God can do anything. He cannot do anything He wants. There are two things that He cannot do as stated by Himself in the Bible; that is, He cannot lie and He cannot change. So an argument that starts with a flawed assumption doesn't work.

He cannot do anything He wants.

I'm sure not going to argue that with HIM:()

That's got nothing to do with His perfection. The argument used on me constantly at work actually went *If God can do anything He wants, can He make a rock to big for Himslef to lift?* But the argument is based on a incorrect assumption; that is, that God can do anything. He cannot do anything He wants. There are two things that He cannot do as stated by Himself in the Bible; that is, He cannot lie and He cannot change. So an argument that starts with a flawed assumption doesn't work.

(note: this comment is to just challenge traditional understanding, I'm a believer, just not a blind follower) Let's change the argument. If G_od is perfect, and prior to creation, was the only existence, and if all creation came from G_od, then explain imperfection, sin, & evil. Can imperfection come from perfection? How can sin and evil exist if G_od is perfect and nothing outside of G_od exists prior to creation- thus, nothing outside G_od exists?

Maybe there are no answers to any of these questions we pose because we are always trying to make G_od in our image instead of actually searching for G_od? We are trying to answer some of these deep questions to each other when it is impossible to answer these questions with the limitations of human understanding/existance.

"He cannot lie and He cannot change."

So how does that exclude Him from making a rock too big for Him to lift, exactly?

I'll stick with Pastafarianism, thanks. We have Fridays off as religious holidays.

So an argument that starts with a flawed assumption doesn't work.

Actually the assumption is if God is perfect can he build a rock so big he could not lift it. The context in which it was used was to refute Descartes attempt to prove that God is perfect. I assumed nothing but only ask the question. Emperical evidence has yet to be found for the existance of God but the most well known proof for the existance of God is simply that most people believe in God therefore he must exist. It was refuted by most most people believe in a flat earth therefore the earth must be flat. Most religions seek to prove that its God is the only true God. The logical refute is that out of billions of people that have existed and the millions of religions that have existed what are the odds that any one religion is of the true God. At best a million to one.