omnipotence

omnipotence is without limit to action

and is thus a contradixtion to itself explained in the following problem

if x is omnipotent, can x create a rock that x cannot lift

is yes, x is not omnipotent (cannot lift the rock)

if no, x is not omnipotent (cannot make an unliftable rock)

but this dosnt seem intirely true....i cant put my finger on it but theirs a way around this

 

Here is a good web page for you that describes some logical contradictions like the one you presented:
http://www.dovidgottlieb.com/comments/Omnipotence_and_Evil_Part_1.htm

some more stuff that will help you understand omnipotence is:
Omnipotent:1 often capitalized : [size=-1]ALMIGHTY [/size]1
2 : having virtually unlimited authority or influence

Almighty:having absolute power over all <Almighty God>

 

This is why I have no problem with a polytheistic worldview and having more than a few "Almighties" running around in the universe. Omnipotence is itself, as you pointed out, an oxymoron but it is a good enough term to use to describe those things so big that we as mortals will never be able to grasp their limits.

An outgrowth of what you propose helped confirm my belief though that some things do lay beyond the Gods, in short they cannot be less than what they are without some serious consequences, at least not as a normal rule, and I think we (all life, not just humans) are their means of understanding what it means to live a finite existence.

 

You are thinking that an omnipotent being A) Has a body, like your's probably, B) Has the same motives and desires that you do, C) Exists in or percieves time the same way you do, and D) is not infact the rock itself...

 

and what are you thinkning?

 

this is flawed logic, it doesn't work that way. Don't make me take out my logic textbook and try to explain boolean equations to you in all that fancy philosopher talk. There is no such thing as a rock that omnipotent X cannot lift, by definition of omnipotence... You are only arguing in circles. If one argument in your logic is untrue, that makes the conclusion false as well.


as for the existence of an omnipotent force or being in the universe, there are lots of better arguments out there refuting its possibility, and very very few that stand up to much intellectual scrutiny. It requires a leap of faith to beleive certain things, but that leap of faith trumps any logical arguments anyone can make.