omnipotence vs conceptual forces

[shinigan no sora]

Any omnipotent I.E TOAA or KAMI TENCHI versus conceptual forces such as death and change(chaos)

[NBT]

Concept ceases to exist.Da end.

[Frost ninja]

This isn't really the best section I dont think, but ok.

You eliminate the "concept".
Thats not the same as eliminating the "force".

You stopped the idea of it, but last I checked forces like change and death don't run on ideas. Calling them "conceptual" forces would only apply to death due to the ideal of "after life" and so on.

Change isn't a "concept". Its what happens when... well... anything at all does any form of action. You can't get rid of it, especially when its the root of your own power as an omnipotent.

[Frost ninja]

Just to throw more salt in the mix, "omnipotence" is a conceptual force since its true limits are set only by what we judge is limitless. Its something man created in order to describe forces so beyond themselves in power that we consider them of "infinite" capability, when in reality the only way we can judge this is by our own standard of what is truly "infinite".

Change is something that depends on nothing, being it is the bridge between action. Its a force that cannot be conceptualized being that it has no limit or domain, that anything that IS possible IS affected by change. If nothing else, Change is the only true limitless force.

[shinigan no sora]

Actually since omnipotence is above other concepts can exist without change

An omnipotent can redesign the concept of change and the idea that it represents

Basically an omni can exchange the idea of having a concept like change into nothing

For example an omni can just decide that the source of his power is the lack of change and therefore. Make the need for change non existant

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by shinigan no sora

Actually since omnipotence is above other concepts can exist without change

An omnipotent can redesign the concept of change and the idea that it represents

Basically an omni can exchange the idea of having a concept like change into nothing

For example an omni can just decide that the source of his power is the lack of change and therefore. Make the need for change non existant

You say this, but he cannot "decide" the source of his power. As he is an "omnipotent" he does so by our rules, since the only reason he is an omni is because we deemed him one. If he eliminates change, he ceases to be omnipotent since he would require change to have power over his domain.

Above this, eliminating the need for "change" doesn't cease change from happening. If he eliminated the need for change, and then eliminated Discord (change), then change would still be occuring in both his action and the result.

An omnipotent is only capable of what he can accomplish within the limits of his "limitless" power. However, in deciding upon him "omnipotence" we have ceased it entirely since our rules on the matter contradict the ideal itself.

Omnipotence is just a word, we cannot apply it to anyone since doing so would cease their "limitless" by forcing them to define by the rules of what we can deem "omnipotent". If he eliminates change, then he is automatically done since he only exists as a "concept" in the form of omnipotence. The result of anything, the bridge to whatever action may come next in the grand scheme, is change. If you rid the bridges, then you cannot do anything, meaning you cannot be omnipotent. Even under the ideal they "can" eliminate it, the matter of things is even if they do it still exists. Its natural, it doesn't play by the rules we set.

[Frost ninja]

To put it in a line.

We made omnipotence.

Thus, we > omnipotence since without us, the ideal wouldn't exist.

Change is something we can't control, where as we can control what is and isn't an omnipotent.

Thus Change > we > omnipotence.

The fact that you say what he can do is proof enough that we judge what is possible in their power. However, you can't say what will happen in the future, or how it will affect everything else in existence around you, nor can you openly control such things. You can't say "Change can do everything except..." Because it doesn't need to listen to you to keep doing what it does.

Meanwhile, if we change the definition of omnipotence to "A being of almost limitless power" then that is what he is, a being of almost limitless power. He doesn't keep being limitless when we draw the line in the sand on the matter, and if we alter the rules to say "A man of limitless power" then anything aside from a man is no longer defined as an omnipotent.

Past that, theres different judgements on what true omnipotence is. Some consider the christian god an omnipotent (not to offend anyone of that group), but others draw very obvious contradictions between the lines and the only fall-back to defend one's omnipotence is "because he can, he is an omnipotent". This statement robs the power from the being, since the only reason he is powerful is because we consider him as such.

[Shikamaru Nara]

With SnS here.
Omnipotents alter the force, or lack thereof, and impact of an attack and nullifies it.

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by Shikamaru Nara

With SnS here.
Omnipotents alter the force, or lack thereof, and impact of an attack and nullifies it.

Okay. That doesn't mean anything in the topic for right now but I'll call on it later if I have to. We are debating the ideal of if an omnipotent can eliminate change.


They say yes because as an omnipotent, he has limitless power and can do what he wants.

I say no since the ideal of "omnipotent" is a concept, meanwhile change is a force than cannot be altered manually, and exists outside of "non-existance" because it is a natural force and doesn't abide by the usual rules of things. Also that as an omnipotent, he requires change in order to maintain his power, even if he doesn't want to.

Basically its a "He is god" and "He is god because we say he is god" style of debate.

[Shikamaru Nara]

It does apply.
The attack in this situation IS the change.

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by Shikamaru Nara

It does apply.
The attack in this situation IS the change.

The change of what?

[Cult of Personality]

By definition omnipotence can not fail to do something unless it specifically chooses to.

An omnipotent being can do anything without limit or restriction. Period.

Frost Ninja's "arguments" are meaningless from start to finish. Just rehashing the same old tired and annoying arguments that got My Little Pony threads banned, I.E. Discord > omnipotent, which is axiomatically untrue.

And since we all know that Frost Ninja is never going to admit to being wrong, I vote this thread be locked with extreme prejudice.

[Ultimate combatant]

Originally Posted by Frost ninja

The change of what?

Doesn`t matter. If omnipotent wishes there can be change. Omnipotent decides whether there is change.

It decides whether it dominates concepts, whether it destroys concepts, whether it creates them, whether he does whatever else he wants,...

In other words, Omnipotent wins!!!

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Originally Posted by Shikamaru Nara

With SnS here.
Omnipotents alter the force, or lack thereof, and impact of an attack and nullifies it.

Just infract frost for trolling and be done with it

anyone who thinks an omnipoten cant erase chaos from existence or death or anything really either is biase beyond belief or is trolling

[Frost ninja]

P:

For someone who upholds the rules so strictly, IWD, you sure are coming shorthanded.
I'm challenging the idea of "proof without proof", or rather, assumptions. Something you went 5 pages with me about because you said evidence without proof takes a backseat to proof with evidence.

So I want more than a definition of a word to accept it. Perhaps some proof to the matter, more than just a word and "heres what it means".

Wheres the proof of an omnipotence? I can prove change just by doing anything at all, and I cannot prevent change. I can, however, prevent an omnipotent simply by erasing the word. Hell, I could openly claim Discord removes the term "omnipotence" from existance and thats the done deal since such things don't exist outside of man's judgement and a few words in a dictionary.

You can't erase the "concept" of change and it magically disappears. You can erase the "concept" of omnipotence, or openly change it, and its as feeble as you decide it to be. Change is not under the same grip, and thus the power of change is openly more powerful than the ideal of omnipotence.

[Ultimate combatant]

Originally Posted by Frost ninja

P:

For someone who upholds the rules so strictly, IWD, you sure are coming shorthanded.
I'm challenging the idea of "proof without proof", or rather, assumptions. Something you went 5 pages with me about because you said evidence without proof takes a backseat to proof with evidence.

So I want more than a definition of a word to accept it. Perhaps some proof to the matter, more than just a word and "heres what it means".

Wheres the proof of an omnipotence? I can prove change just by doing anything at all, and I cannot prevent change. I can, however, prevent an omnipotent simply by erasing the word. Hell, I could openly claim Discord removes the term "omnipotence" from existance and thats the done deal since such things don't exist outside of man's judgement and a few words in a dictionary.

You can't erase the "concept" of change and it magically disappears. You can erase the "concept" of omnipotence, or openly change it, and its as feeble as you decide it to be. Change is not under the same grip, and thus the power of change is openly more powerful than the ideal of omnipotence.

Omnipotent who couldn`t erase or destroy concepts or defeat them wouldn`t be Omnipotent, by definition!!!

[Frost ninja]

I'm not saying "Discord beats TOAA because omnipotent is a concept", what I'm saying is "TOAA doesn't simply beat discord BECAUSE he is an omnipotent." Whatever his feats have shown is a seperate issue, but just going off of a word we can benchmark on anything with power beyond our own imagination is a shoddy way to debate at best.

"Discord is an omnipotent, so its a tie". Why not? Theres no limit to what he can, per se, do. Theres no feated limit to his range, he has open toonforce and what could be pegged an omnipresence thanks to his "quip-port". The only reason you'd argue against it is because "he hasn't shown it".

So then show me feats and I'll openly agree TOAA likely does beat Discord. But not because he is an "omnipotent". If we are here to argue omnipotence vs change, the topic name should be "conceptual forces vs change".

[Ultimate combatant]

Originally Posted by Frost ninja

I'm not saying "Discord beats TOAA because omnipotent is a concept", what I'm saying is "TOAA doesn't simply beat discord BECAUSE he is an omnipotent." Whatever his feats have shown is a seperate issue, but just going off of a word we can benchmark on anything with power beyond our own imagination is a shoddy way to debate at best.

"Discord is an omnipotent, so its a tie". Why not? Theres no limit to what he can, per se, do. Theres no feated limit to his range, he has open toonforce and what could be pegged an omnipresence thanks to his "quip-port". The only reason you'd argue against it is because "he hasn't shown it".

So then show me feats and I'll openly agree TOAA likely does beat Discord. But not because he is an "omnipotent". If we are here to argue omnipotence vs change, the topic name should be "conceptual forces vs change".

Is Discord Omnipotent?!!

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by Ultimate combatant

Omnipotent who couldn`t erase or destroy concepts or defeat them wouldn`t be Omnipotent, by definition!!!

They already aren't omnipotent because their "infinite" power can be defined. Likewise, an omnipotent cannot beat another omnipotent, so they still aren't omnipotent by definition.

If you want to talk definition, then you'll instantly lose since the definition is in-itself contradictory and doesn't account for more than one omnipotent being in existance. Hence why people avoid Omni vs Omni threads like the plague.

Look up the "TOAA vs All" thread and see that the term omnipotent lost meaning entirely in that thread and people scrambled to figure out the scope of infinite.

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by Ultimate combatant

Is Discord Omnipotent?!!

Does it matter? If I say yes, whats your counter?
Would it happen to be the same as mine if you say "TOAA is omnipotent"?
Is your counter "Prove it?"

Because if so, then your answer is as good as mine if we go off of definition alone.