Is Anything wrong with my logic?

Originally posted by 667joe
If god were a baseball player, it would be safe to say god would be the best baseball player, right? The question is could god the pitcher strike out god the batter? Conversely, could god the batter hit a home run off god the pitcher? No matter how you look at this riddle, god comes out less than omnipotent. In my view this riddle makes a case that there is no god.

Alternatively your riddle makes a case for god not being a baseball player.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Alternatively your riddle makes a case for god not being a baseball player.

So, at the least, you agree, god is not omnipotent.

Originally posted by 667joe
So, at the least, you agree, god is not omnipotent.

I agree that according to your definition of 'god' he is not a baseball player.

Originally posted by dj2becker
I agree that according to your definition of 'god' he is not a baseball player.

I feel comfortable agreeing with you on your last statement.

Originally posted by 667joe
If god were a baseball player, it would be safe to say god would be the best baseball player, right? The question is could god the pitcher strike out god the batter? Conversely, could god the batter hit a home run off god the pitcher? No matter how you look at this riddle, god comes out less than omnipotent. In my view this riddle makes a case that there is no god.

The flaw in your logic is this that you are thinking within the realm of your limited intellect. Trying to confine God to a physical world of your limited understanding naturally places limits on the Power of God. So hence your supposition creates a paradox where an omnipotent God is impotent. When one considers the view that God lives outside the realm of possibilities that we understand then no paradox exists that God cannot overcome.

Originally posted by 667joe
I feel comfortable agreeing with you on your last statement.

Just keep in mind that not all truths 'feel comfortable'...

Originally posted by Doward
The flaw in your logic is this that you are thinking within the realm of your limited intellect. Trying to confine God to a physical world of your limited understanding naturally places limits on the Power of God. So hence your supposition creates a paradox where an omnipotent God is impotent. When one considers the view that God lives outside the realm of possibilities that we understand then no paradox exists that God cannot overcome.

You admit you have a limited understanding of god, i.e. that you don't have all the facts, but you have the temerity to say I am thinking in terms of my limited intellect. May I suggest that you are thinking in terms of your limited intellect also. Just as a square circle cannot exist, neither can a god by conventional definition. I am not the world's greatest thinker, but I am not delusional as are theists.

Originally posted by 667joe
You admit you have a limited understanding of god, i.e. that you don't have all the facts, but you have the temerity to say I am thinking in terms of my limited intellect. May I suggest that you are thinking in terms of your limited intellect also. Just as a square circle cannot exist, neither can a god by conventional definition. I am not the world's greatest thinker, but I am not delusional as are theists.

I said you have a limited intellect and understanding

Originally posted by Doward
I said [b]you have a limited intellect and understanding[/b]

Mark Twain (an atheist by the way) said good manners is concealing the high opinion you have of yourself and the low opinion you have of the other person.

Originally posted by Doward
I said [b]you have a limited intellect and understanding[/b]

Is your intellect greater than Mark Twain's, Voltaire's, Bertrand Russell's, and Bill Gate's? (All atheists)

Originally posted by 667joe
Is your intellect greater than Mark Twain's, Voltaire's, Bertrand Russell's, and Bill Gate's? (All atheists)

So if Einstein believed in 'god' what would that prove?

Originally posted by dj2becker
So if Einstein believed in 'god' what would that prove?

Actually, Einstein was an atheist also. My point was being an atheist does not ipso facto mean that said atheist has a limited intellect.

Originally posted by 667joe
Is your intellect greater than Mark Twain's, Voltaire's, Bertrand Russell's, and Bill Gate's? (All atheists)

likely not, but certainly greater than yours

Originally posted by 667joe
Actually, Einstein was an atheist also. My point was being an atheist does not ipso facto mean that said atheist has a limited intellect.

Let's say that you know an incredible one percent of all the knowledge in the universe. To know 100 percent, you would have to know everything. There wouldn't be a rock in the universe that you would not be intimately familiar with, or a grain of sand that you would not be aware of. You would know everything that has happened in history, from that which is common knowledge to the minor details of the secret love life of Napoleon's great-grandmother's black cat's fleas. You would know every hair of every head, and every thought of every heart. All history would be laid out before you, because you would be omniscient.
Bear in mind that one of the greatest scientists who ever lived, Thomas Edison, said, "We do not know a millionth of one percent about anything." Let me repeat: Let's say that you have an incredible one percent of all the knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the ninety-nine percent of the knowledge that you haven't yet come across, that there might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God?

Originally posted by 667joe
Actually, Einstein was an atheist also. My point was being an atheist does not ipso facto mean that said atheist has a limited intellect.

Mark Twain, Voltaire, Bertrand Russell, Bill Gates, Dan Brown, Snoop Dog and the Pope all have limited knowledge, unless they know everything about everything, which is highly unlikely.