7
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 27:
Line 27: + + + + + + +
Proposition for a link addition made to the "Omnipotence" page.
If God is omnipotent, then he should be able to create another omnipotent being. If God and his creation were to have an arm-wrestle, each trying to win, who would? [[User:JimAB|JimAB]] 19:18, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
If God is omnipotent, then he should be able to create another omnipotent being. If God and his creation were to have an arm-wrestle, each trying to win, who would? [[User:JimAB|JimAB]] 19:18, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:In physics, biology, math, logic, epistemology, etc., the only way for a primary to result in another primary is if there is no such thing as a primary: anything mistaken as 'primary' can result in another 'primary'. But, if, in epistemology there is no primary, then there is nothing, not even a primary object of knowledge (i.e., God) [[User:PatternOfPersona|PatternOfPersona]] 22:40, 30 June 2011 (EDT)
:In physics, biology, math, logic, epistemology, etc., the only way for a primary to result in another primary is if there is no such thing as a primary: anything mistaken as 'primary' can result in another 'primary'. But, if, in epistemology there is no primary, then there is nothing, not even a primary object of knowledge (i.e., God) [[User:PatternOfPersona|PatternOfPersona]] 22:40, 30 June 2011 (EDT)
== Adding a Link to the Omnipotence Page ==
I have a website titled [[stoneparadox.org]] that deals with the Omnipotence Paradox (specifically the ''Stone Paradox'') which offers a counter-paradoxical resolution to the original paradox. It takes the twisted use of paradoxical logic that the Stone Paradox uses to eliminate omnipotence and ironically turns it around to eliminate the Stone Paradox. The only logical conclusion that can be drawn is that a paradox is unable to establish the existence (or non-existence) of anything at all.<br /><br />
It's called the "Circular God Counter-paradox" and is the #1 answer to the [https://www.quora.com/Can-god-make-a-rock-so-heavy-that-he-couldn%E2%80%99t-lift-it/answer/Darryl-Lankford?srid=uqDtf Paradox of the Stone] on Quora.com out of 365 answers offered since 2010. It also holds a copyright via the U.S Copyright Office. There is a [https://youtu.be/YDTsYYGNAMY video series] that fully explains how the CGCP resolution works to defeat the Stone Paradox and is the leading video search result on a [https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&source=hp&q=stone+paradox+solution&oq=stone+paradox+solution&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39k1.1554.7935.0.8308.29.27.1.0.0.0.203.3202.3j22j1.26.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..2.27.3205.0..0j0i131k1j0i20i264k1j0i10k1j0i22i10i30k1j0i22i30k1j33i160k1j0i8i13i30k1.0.O9YdBScYWN4 "stone paradox solution"] Google search.<br /><br />
I would like to add a link for the stoneparadox.org website on this conservapedia.com page which deals with "Omnipotence" as I think it is relevant to the subject. I made the unfortunate mistake of trying to add this link to the RationalWiki page that deals with the [https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox Omnipotence Paradox], but I was surprisingly mocked and ridiculed. Nobody offered any valid arguments against the CGCP resolution at all (which confused me) but then I did some research on RationalWiki and discovered it is a "skeptics website" which advocates/promotes Atheism. Apparently anything that challenges the Stone Paradox is not welcome there. This is sad, because this CGCP resolution has nothing to do with God or Atheism at all. It's just a counter-paradox.<br /><br />
I didn't want to just add the link on conservapedia.com's "Omnipotence" page without first getting some feedback from others on this matter. I'm also not sure where it could be added? I was thinking a "Links" section could be added right above the "References" section and then the link could be added there (along with other links of interest). ...Thoughts?--[[User:Birdman DSL|Birdman DSL]] ([[User talk:Birdman DSL|talk]]) 10:00, 14 October 2017 (EDT)