Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 415
S
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
S
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 415

God 's power and the "heavy stone"
==..
The old paradox:
Can God make a stone so heavy that He can't lift it?
My opinion.
a)
Why does God need to create such stone?
Is He a stupid One? No, He isn't stupid.
He took another solution.
Instead such "heavy stone" He decided to create billions and billions
"small" Galaxies with many – many planets with reasonable people
( even if some of them would ask the question above).
b)
God can create the Universe only using physical-math laws.
And as a wise One He limited all physical-math parameters
in the Universe. These limitations show the God's power.
But a foolish doesn't know the God's laws of limitations and
ask the question above.
c)
The concrete physical-math answer to the question about
the "heavy stone" God gave as " the Chandrasekhar limit":
" Chandrasekhar calculated that a cold star of more than about
one and a half times the mass of the sun, would not be able
to support itself against its own gravity. This mass is now
known as the Chandrasekhar limit."
/ page 38/
"However, when he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1983,
it was, at least in part, for his early work on the limiting mass
of cold stars." /page39/
Book:
/ The theory of everything. Third lecture. By Stephen W. Hawking./
=.
Once again: the limits of all physical laws and parameters show
the God's wisdom and Human's stupidity.
==..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==,

.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
ORAC, IN WRITING THIS POST FROM WHICH I QUOTE, ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT GOD IS A PERSON? IF SO, LET'S THINK ABOUT IT, OK!
Quote:
He decided to create billions and billions
"small" Galaxies with many – many planets with reasonable people
( even if some of them would ask the question above).
b)
God can create the Universe only using physical-math laws.
And as a wise One He limited all physical-math parameters
in the Universe. These limitations show the God's power.
But a foolish doesn't know the God's laws of limitations and
ask the question above.
c)
The concrete physical-math answer to the question about
the "heavy stone" God gave as " the Chandrasekhar limit":
" Chandrasekhar calculated that a cold star of more than about
one and a half times the mass of the sun, would not be able
to support itself against its own gravity. This mass is now
known as the Chandrasekhar limit."
/ page 38/
"However, when he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1983,
it was, at least in part, for his early work on the limiting mass
of cold stars." /page39/
Book:
/ The theory of everything. Third lecture. By Stephen W. Hawking./
=.
Once again: the limits of all physical laws and parameters show God's wisdom and Human's stupidity.
==..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==,
The following is simply about thinking things through.

IN MY OPINION, [b]G~0~D
is in, through, around and at-ONE-ment with us. To govern our political, economic and social system, there are three parties from which to choose:

1. THE GOLDEN RULE PARTY--TGRP (with a tendency to be left-winged) advocates treating others as you would like others to treat you. TRGP is a strong advocate of democracy, the Four Freedoms, including life, liberty and the economic right to have regular employment and an annual income.

2. THE BRASS KNUCKLES PARTY--TBNP (with a tendency to be right-winged) advocates having the right to scrutinize all economic transactions of TGRP so as to make sure that there is honesty and transparency; that TGRP delivers to one and all what it claims to deliver and within a balanced budget.

3. THE TAIL-FEATHERS PARTY--TTFP with a tendency to want the wings of the bird to always be in balance) Without healthy tail-feathers no migrating bird is able to take off, fly there and back to get food and water it needs to survive its annual trips. No wonder--in
Matt 23:27-38 and Luke 13:34-35) Jesus lamented over Jerusalem: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you kill the prophets and stoned the messengers God sent you. How many times I wanted to put my arms around all your people, just as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you would not let me. And so your Temple will be abandoned and empty." ...

Last edited by Revlgking; 06/28/15 08:32 PM. Reason: Always helpful

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
ORAC, IN WRITING THIS POST FROM WHICH I QUOTE, ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT GOD IS A PERSON?

Uh.. Orac didn't write this post. It's signed by and posted under the name:
Israel Sadovnik Socratus

Must be having another senior moment.. wink
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

IN MY OPINION, G~0~D IS US. WE ARE GOVERNED BY TWO RULES:
1. THE GOLDEN RULE--BY WHICH WE DO FOR AND SERVE OTHERS. OR

2. THE BRASS KNUCKLES RULE: BY WHICH WE DO OTHERS, BEFORE THEY DO US.
The most obvious argument against your theory that God is an US, rather than a person, Is that US is at odds with its selves in that US has no recollection of creating much of anything as a collective, being that US feels it is thrown into the world that has already been created and is desperately trying to fix its problems as it is self absorbed in personal glory and badges of suffering. US measures its selves thru principals that become obsolete as US evolves.

If US is GOD, then who created the world in which US creates war and famine, and as individuals can't read and comprehend a post he addresses or who he addresses it to? Perhaps it is the US that exemplifies narcissistic behavior which rules by the third rule : Do unto others as you would believe the world was created so it conforms to ones ideals, and pays homage to ones own idolatry in self glorification? whistle

I suppose if you get the message that you addressed the wrong person either by reading this (being that you repeatedly speak to the fact that you have me on ignore, yet address my posts anyway) or clearing the octogenarian type fog.. you can post the usual example that God edits his or her (US's) statements about as often as he/she/us makes them, because it's always helpful to show God can't get it straight the first time.

Silly GOD('s)... grin


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Like Ms Ellis from Australia, I always ignore mind-numbing posts which make no sense to me. Thank GOD for the I button! I find it cool Regardless, I always give GOD-like and good WILL! smile


G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
That's hilarious smile

OK then..... Let the ignorance continue! crazy


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
God 's power and the "heavy stone"


Why do people keep exhuming this patent absurdity?

I guess it must be because it always elicits a response in keeping with its absurdity.


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Quote:
God 's power and the "heavy stone"


Why do people keep exhuming this patent absurdity?

I guess it must be because it always elicits a response in keeping with its absurdity.


You think a philosophical discussion regarding God is absurd?


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
You think a philosophical discussion regarding God is absurd?


Now, there's something I didn't say.


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Quote:
You think a philosophical discussion regarding God is absurd?


Now, there's something I didn't say.

The question regarding God creating a stone so heavy he could not lift it, is philosophical.

It extends ones thoughts into the contemplation of God and possibility to see where the limits of human ideas are.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
No it's both absurd and philosophy ..... and that pretty much sums up philosophy smile

There are however even better forms of the question which are fantastic

Does GOD have a GOD?

or perhaps

What GOD(s) came before GOD?

They are equally entertaining philosophical and religious questions. To treat it seriously one has to take definitive positions and on what basis can one do that. One must be at least equal to the lowest GOD to answer with authority laugh

If you are a philosophical drama queen I guess one then asks....How does one prove a question is invalid?

All good janitors know that one must first be sure one has a basis to ask any question, as most questions are invalid or at best flawed smile

BONUS QUESTION: Does GOD ever lie?

Last edited by Orac; 07/01/15 07:46 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
BONUS QUESTION: Does GOD ever lie?


No, he sits on a throne!


There never was nothing.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Haha very good smile

Now can you cite witnesses to that? If it's just a claim attributed to god or a prophet, I fear we are back to square one smile


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: TT
The question regarding God creating a stone so heavy he could not lift it, is philosophical.

It extends ones thoughts into the contemplation of God and possibility to see where the limits of human ideas are.


The concept of weight is directly related to gravity. Find an example of this absurd pseudo-philosophy that adequately addresses the role of gravity in the scenario.

Having done that, you might then want to find an example that contains a definition of a "stone" in terms of supernatural powers and their possible limitations.

TT, if posts #54066 & #54072 really reflect what you think I meant, then it must, surely be that you were either just looking for an argument for its own sake, or your usual apparent intelligence has, hopefully temporarily, abandoned you.


There never was nothing.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: Orac
Now can you cite witnesses to that? If it's just a claim attributed to god or a prophet, I fear we are back to square one


On your own admission, this is philosophy, not science. "What [further] need have we of witnesses?" Matthew 26:65.

Can you cite the location co-ordinates for square one?


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Originally Posted By: TT
The question regarding God creating a stone so heavy he could not lift it, is philosophical.

It extends ones thoughts into the contemplation of God and possibility to see where the limits of human ideas are.


The concept of weight is directly related to gravity. Find an example of this absurd pseudo-philosophy that adequately addresses the role of gravity in the scenario.

Gravity is a relative experience. God however is supposedly beyond all relative boundaries and measure, regardless of whether mortal boundaries are inclusive of God.

What part of God by any definition is assumed to be bound by any relative measure, other than one derived by mortal man defining God as limited by imagined constructs?


Originally Posted By: Bill S.

Having done that, you might then want to find an example that contains a definition of a "stone" in terms of supernatural powers and their possible limitations.

See answer to first quote...

Originally Posted By: Bill S.

TT, if posts #54066 & #54072 really reflect what you think I meant, then it must, surely be that you were either just looking for an argument for its own sake, or your usual apparent intelligence has, hopefully temporarily, abandoned you.

I was looking to have you expand upon the ideas you presented within the context of philosophy, rather than literal idealism's devoid of philosophical content,so the philosophical question could be explored beyond the usual waking state paradigms.

Still waiting.. frown


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: TT
Gravity is a relative experience. God however is supposedly beyond all relative boundaries and measure, regardless of whether mortal boundaries are inclusive of God.

What part of God by any definition is assumed to be bound by any relative measure, other than one derived by mortal man defining God as limited by imagined constructs?


You make such a persuasive argument for the utter absurdity of the heavy stone "paradox" that little, if anything, more needs to be said.

Quote:
Still waiting.. frown


Perhaps try up-grading your starting point, or you could have a long wait.


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill S.


Perhaps try up-grading your starting point, or you could have a long wait.

I'm not invested in any outcomes. The point has already been made.

Some just can't climb out of the relative box.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: TT
I'm not invested in any outcomes.


Quote:
Still waiting..


Waiting for something in which you have no investment?

I hope you're not disappointed. smile


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill S.


Waiting for something in which you have no investment?

I hope you're not disappointed. smile



The best example is of one who stands ready, capable and always willing.

What else is there in life, but to stand in Selfless service, ready to move forward with the challenges that are, life itself.

When there is no investment in outcomes, true joy is experienced in every moment. No worries about the future or regrets for the past. Only the ever extending presence of the eternal potential moment. Everything connected, all moving as One consciousness.

The opposite of course is when you tend to glamorize your self, take credit for everything and make up acronyms for your personal idols, then stand in front of the mirror while smiling and winking at your self. wink
That kind of stone, weighs you down and forever keeps you from being lifted beyond mortal thoughts, or the identification with mortality, age and death.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle

The opposite of course is when you tend to glamorize your self, take credit for everything and make up acronyms for your personal idols, then stand in front of the mirror while smiling and winking at your self.

Yes Tutor, don't take yourself too seriously. Relax and realize that what you believe doesn't mean a hill of beans when it comes to the real world. What you can actually count on is what really matters. Pseudo-philosophical mumbling doesn't do much good if you don't wink at it occasionally. It can be fun, but one shouldn't get too carried away with it.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5