stop thinking about God within the confines of your own physical existence. free your mind and your ass will follow you dig?
"Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that even he couldn't eat it?" -Homer Simpson This is a funny conundrum but it is neither a compelling argument against God, nor logical. 1. This is called a fallacy of Contradictory Premises. You may as well ask "Can God create a circular triangle?" No, because be definition a triangle is not circular. Also, by definition, God cannot surpass himself since he is by definition the greatest power in the Universe. You argument may be a reason why God cannot do the logically impossible, but that doesn't seem to be a big problem. 2. I'm no biblical scholar (I'd consider myself a deist at best) but where in the Bible does it lay claim to God being able to do anything? I mean, it says created all of this, and that he's all powerful, but where does it say he can make 2 + 2 = 5? When I do read the bible's statements about God's power, e.g. Job, it seems to be more about how his power is so great that it cannot be challenged, not that he can do ANYTHING. I'm sure you just did this for fun rather than a serious debate, and it is a funny thing to watch people rattle around in their brains, but it's no more a convincing argument against the existence of God than Anselm's Ontological Argument is a proof that God does exist. If you are looking for reasons to argue against God, you're better off looking elsewhere, e.g. the bible doesn't outlaw slavery, the existence of evil, failed prophecies, etc. I don't want this to erupt into a debate about those because I don't think it'll get us anywhere. But if you're interested they are worth looking into.
I am the Truth, the Light, and the Way. I am a Rock, I am an Island. And a Rock feels no pain; And an Island never cries.
Nice response! Also, I found this link on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God It has a nice rundown of arguments for and against the existence of God. Personally, I feel the biggest problem in attempting to have a coherent argument is in defining God. It doesn't seem to be a well defined concept for most people, so even begininng to have a discussion about its existence or lack thereof seems silly.
Because bugs and dandruff are two things Invisible Fan shouldn't have in his beard. Those nasty buggers can get into anythi... HEY! HEY!!! GET OUT OF HERE!!!!... sorry... I had to take my hands off the keyboard there for a second.
I think this is a big problem too. Many people will just make assumptions about what an omnipotent or omniscient being should or shouldn't be capable of, or what it means to be all loving, etc. What's even more silly I think, is the predispositions both sides bring to the debate. When these debates break out, deists will put the honus on atheists to dispove god's existnece. They will simply make the claim that all they have to do is prove that there isn't proof god does not exist. Atheists, on the other hand, will often put outrageous expecations on the god they attack through their arguments. Either way, you're right, it's usually a pretty pointless debate. In fact, I'd be willing to lay money down that less than 2% of the population is suspectible to persuasion on the issue of god's existence. I think that 98% of people are locked into a certain way of looking at the world and evidence of a creator and will always interpret what they see one way or the other. The only real way to see a change in their beliefs is when they change as people, not when someone else changes their mind.
