Omnipotents: The truth

[CrimsonCatClan]

They would have the knowledge of actions and thought around them. Confidence would come naturally. If they had no self confidence that would be a weakness, now wouldn't it. If one knows the reaction and outcome, then they would have innate confidence in themselves.

[Sabra Kusabana]

But if there existed others of equal power to their own, then they may actually be unable to predict their reactions. Any being may consider their peir's reactions with worry if they are on equal standing. Innate confidence comes with knowing of self, but cannot be complete without considerations of others.

[ihazcetsup]

The word omnipotent is a combination of Omni = all, limitless and Potent = powerful, having ability. Omnipotent, therefor means all powerful. I believe Crimson was thinking of the word Omniscient for all knowing.

[CrimsonCatClan]

The omnipotent being can create an item or situation that it could not overcome at the moment of creation. Being omnipotent, however, the being can always alter the item or situation later so that it can be done. Therefore the being is still omnipotent. It would be known by any other omnipotent being that this could be done and therfore they wouldn't worry about it.

[ihazcetsup]

If you are by definition omnipotent then you are limitless in power. If this is so, there is nothing they cannot achieve.As we are talking about an omnipotent being being faced with a challenge at a specific point in time, the current amount of force the omnipotent being is bringing to bare may or may not be enough to complete the task (lifting the rock for instance). This does not mean that the task is impossible as a being of limitless power would just have to try harder or change something about the task so the current task can be completed with the current amount of power or strength said being is willing to bring to bare.

[CrimsonCatClan]

If a being isomnipotent, then it can also resolve the paradox (as long as we take omnipotence not to require absolute omnipotence). The omnipotent being is essentially omnipotent, and therefore it is impossible for it to be non-omnipotent. Further, the omnipotent being cannot do what is logically impossible. The creation of a stone which the omnipotent being cannot lift would be an impossibility, and therefore the omnipotent being is not required to do such a thing. The omnipotent being cannot create such a stone, but nevertheless retains its omnipotence. This solution works as long as we also know the being is omnipotent. The human factor is what would create the title of omnipotent and have it be awarded to a creature or being.

[Sabra Kusabana]

If the human/worshipper factor is disreguarded then how do you define an omnipotent. How would one be able to measure something that then would have no relative properties to consider omnipotent? If there is no means of measure then there is no Omni to consider Potent.

[ihazcetsup]

It was always a pretty word thrown out there by people trying to impress others. All powerful sorcerer joe, all powerful god, all powerfull peanutbutter and jelly... the list goes on and on.

[CrimsonCatClan]

"For He is called omnipotent on account of His doing what He wills, not on account of His suffering what He wills not; for if that should befall Him, He would by no means be omnipotent. Wherefore, He cannot do some things for the very reason that He is omnipotent." -- Augustine of Hippo

LOL I like knowing quotes to use!!! Anyways on to my next point...

A version of the paradox can also be seen in non-theological contexts as well, though. A very similar problem occurs when accessing legislative or parliamentary sovereignty, which holds a specific legal institution to be omnipotent in legal power, and in particular such an institution's ability to regulate itself. Therefor one can go outside of the laws and governing rules but there are always consequences! LOL. Omnipotents in the real world senario.

[ihazcetsup]

Augustine assumed that "he" would attempt to change what "he" willed not to happen. If there is no attempt to avoid being hit with a goat's bladder or an asteroid then for all the power "he" supposedly has "he" still got hit because there was no attempt to avoid it.

[Sabra Kusabana]

Originally Posted by ihazcetsup

Augustine assumed that "he" would attempt to change what "he" willed not to happen. If there is no attempt to avoid being hit with a goat's bladder or an asteroid then for all the power "he" supposedly has "he" still got hit because there was no attempt to avoid it.

And we come back to what one is willing to do versus what they can.

[CrimsonCatClan]

And yet if a being was omnipotent it could choose to stop such an event. Though looking at the state of humans, it might know it would be best to have it happen. I have to say might because I am (Sadly) not omnipotent.

[Phoenix Wright]

Originally Posted by Gamabunta

The very nature of omnipotence means they are outside of nature, and that laws like these do not apply to them. Once you get your mind around the idea of omnipotence it's very easy to see why these things wouldn't be an issue.

No, they are outside the laws of nature such as time, space and mass.

I don't believe that God has a physical form, he is just THERE. I'm not saying he's the natural being around us which is what some people believe.

If it's outside of which these rules apply, then how is he living? I believe in him, it's just I don't believe in some buff guy with a long white beard. If he's where mass, etc apply, then you can't have physical form.
More like a soul, or such.

[ItachiAnbu]

Originally Posted by Sabra Kusabana

*Picks up history book.* I do believe the greeks&romans covered this one. It's not about what the omnipotent can or cannot do, but about what they are willing to do.

Agreed.

I like your reasoning here.