Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Can Jesus toast bread so hot....


Kay

Recommended Posts

...said challenge from Homer Simpson.

 

Is it even a valid question? Does this question once again challenge the limitations of perfection and omnipotence?

 

Would a christian even deign to try and answer this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Simonpeter or Amanda will. They don't seem to think all that highly of the god they worship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...said challenge from Homer Simpson.

 

Is it even a valid question? Does this question once again challenge the limitations of perfection and omnipotence?

 

Would a christian even deign to try and answer this?

Of course he can. But he can make the toast levitate, so he doesn't have to hold it! Hehehe...

 

So he can toast the bread and still eat it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course he can. But he can make the toast levitate, so he doesn't have to hold it! Hehehe...

 

So he can toast the bread and still eat it.

 

LOL! Agreed.

 

He could also levitate the toast and put it in a lake, just so he could walk across the lake to retrieve the toast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're Catholic, wouldn't a sunburned Jesus be the same as toasted bread? :Doh:

 

 

:HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started to read Harry Potter #6, and the levitation part just came to my mind.

 

And all of a sudden I see a Jesus with round glasses, and a little scar on his forehead, with a wand raised, and say something like:

 

"Comicus Invictus", and then you see Invictus dancing around with a clownface and acting all foolish... sorry, I just saw it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're Catholic, wouldn't a sunburned Jesus be the same as toasted bread?  :Doh:

:HaHa:

AAAAH, so that's why he appears on the toasts all the time!!! Now I get it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cyranothe2nd

LOL, just imagining Jesus (Jim Caveziel with femme hair, of course) burning his hands on hot toast, swaring, then feeling all bad, "Sorry dad!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Joseph
...said challenge from Homer Simpson.

 

Is it even a valid question? Does this question once again challenge the limitations of perfection and omnipotence?

(snip)

 

Let me play devil's advocate...

 

Have you ever toasted bread to a point you could not hold it?

 

So, let us say you have.

 

Omniscience would contain your point of view while at the same time containing a point of view inwhich that same piece of toast would/could be held by a greater Entity. Thus a piece of toast is created which can not be held, and can be held, by a different part of Omniscience.

 

It sorta goes back to the whole "what you have done unto the least of these you have done unto me." The scarey thing is, it sorta makes sense that an Omnisicent Entity would contain all viewpoints by definition, and thus be able to answer this illogical question through a perspective of a finite which would be included within the whole of the total of knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it even a valid question? Does this question once again challenge the limitations of perfection and omnipotence?

 

It's a meaningless question. Since Christians generally claim that God's power is limitless it's logically impossible for a piece of toast to be too hot for God to hold. It's a paradox not unlike asking if God can make a square circle, if I may use the cliche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me play devil's advocate...

 

Have you ever toasted bread to a point you could not hold it?

 

So, let us say you have.

 

Omniscience would contain your point of view while at the same time containing a point of view inwhich that same piece of toast would/could be held by a greater Entity.  Thus a piece of toast is created which can not be held, and can be held, by a different part of Omniscience.

 

It sorta goes back to the whole "what you have done unto the least of these you have done unto me."  The scarey thing is, it sorta makes sense that an Omnisicent Entity would contain all viewpoints by definition, and thus be able to answer this illogical question through a perspective of a finite which would be included within the whole of the total of knowledge.

 

Omniscience is not unique in this regard, as what you have just done is an equivocation and I can do the same thing without omniscience.

 

I can toast bread so hot that I can't hold it, and yet I can hold it. You see, my omnihumance provides me with hands that are too sensitive to hold the hot toast, yet it also provides me with the smarts to use a plate. So I hold the toast by holding the plate it is on. Wonderful thing this omnihumance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jordan

God's omnipotence means that he can do anything, as long as it doesn't defy his nature.

 

Homer's question is like me asking you to be a bird and fly away, yet still be yourself. It's impossible because a bird is not what you are (hopefully)--it's not your nature to be a bird, because you're a person. They're mutually exclusive.

 

If something is inherently possible, then God can do it. My argument is that it's not possible for bread to be toasted so hot that God couldn't pick it up, because if it were possible, that means God would have to defy his omnipotent nature in order to not be able to pick it up.

 

The argument creates an endless loop, which means it's inherently impossible.

 

Short Answer: He couldn't pick it up, because the situation could not exist. DNE, for any calculus students.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jordan, welcome to the site.

 

And then you have the eat the cake and still have it...

 

Another question is, can Jesus toast a sandwich with P&B on it while in the toaster... with no spillage... that's an accomplishment!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God's omnipotence means that he can do anything, as long as it doesn't defy his nature.

 

Homer's question is like me asking you to be a bird and fly away, yet still be yourself. It's impossible because a bird is not what you are (hopefully)--it's not your nature to be a bird, because you're a person. They're mutually exclusive.

 

If something is inherently possible, then God can do it. My argument is that it's not possible for bread to be toasted so hot that God couldn't pick it up, because if it were possible, that means God would have to defy his omnipotent nature in order to not be able to pick it up.

 

The argument creates an endless loop, which means it's inherently impossible.

 

Short Answer: He couldn't pick it up, because the situation could not exist. DNE, for any calculus students.

Problem is, God would have to defy his omnipotent nature in order not to be able to toast it that hot.

 

Either way, God has to defy his nature.

 

Either God CAN toast it that hot, or God cannot. If God cannot, then he's not omnipotent. If he can, then he can't pick it up and he's not omnipotent.

 

When both possible answers are inherently impossible, it's pretty obvious that there's a false assumption in there. Since the only assumption is that God is omnipotent, you've just helped me to prove that he isn't. (and since that is a defining characteristic of a god, you've just helped me prove that God isn't a god...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, just imagining Jesus (Jim Caveziel with femme hair, of course) burning his hands on hot toast, swaring, then feeling all bad, "Sorry dad!"

 

 

Or...

 

Sorry dad. Uh. I mean me. No? I mean dad. Uh... ...I'm so confused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we can resolve this here and now.

 

Can god create a god more powerful than himself?

 

Not if he is omnipotent. Vis a vis, omnipotence is self-contradictory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If something is inherently possible, then God can do it. My argument is that it's not possible for bread to be toasted so hot that God couldn't pick it up, because if it were possible, that means God would have to defy his omnipotent nature in order to not be able to pick it up.

 

 

I won't look it up, but what about the verse that says "all things are possible..."?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument creates an endless loop, which means it's inherently impossible.

 

Short Answer: He couldn't pick it up, because the situation could not exist. DNE, for any calculus students.

 

What crazy-tiger said.

 

My understanding of the word 'omnipotent' was that nothing was impossible for god, and I don't see any qualifiers that would exhaust the defintion of 'nothing'. The lay dictionary.com meaning of omnipotent is:

 

"Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful."

 

Surely 'unlimited' means unlimited, no ifs or buts?

 

Yeah...I know, there does appear to be an element of vexatiousness in Homer's question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God's omnipotence means that he can do anything, as long as it doesn't defy his nature.

 

If he can't defy his own "nature" (he's not a created being, so he has no "nature"), then he isn't omnipotent.

 

You may get away with these types of apologetic responses elsewhere, but not here.

 

You need to either give up the omni aspects, or simply claim that god is not bound by logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short Answer: He couldn't pick it up, because the situation could not exist. DNE, for any calculus students.

Well said, Jordan. Welcome. BtR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said, Jordan. Welcome. BtR

Well said, maybe... but that only makes it well said rubbish.

 

God is omnipotent. All-powerful, nothing is impossible for him, he can do anything.

That is God's nature.

 

For God to be UNABLE to toast it so hot that he can't pick it up, is in direct contradiction to his nature.

 

What Jordan said was that nothing is impossible for God, but it's impossible for God to toast it so hot he can't pick it up...

 

 

 

Nice of Jordan to argue that God is not omnipotent at all. :grin:

 

 

:edit: What is it with the average Christian that stops them from thinking about what they're typing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...said challenge from Homer Simpson.

 

Is it even a valid question? Does this question once again challenge the limitations of perfection and omnipotence?

 

Would a christian even deign to try and answer this?

 

I will say, that it is a trick question. You basically asks if X (Gods ability to make warm toast) is bigger or lesser then Y (Gods ability to hold warm toast). According to Christian thinking X and Y are infinite, and therefor a comparison of these two values is meaningless.

 

If a Christian is stupid enough to try to answer the question, this Christian is an idiot. :wicked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Crazy-Tiger,

 

Please... The premise contains conflicting conditions. http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/define/conflict.htm

 

Peace,

 

BtR

You're right... but if God really was omnipotent, he would be able to do both.

It's omnipotence that contains the conflicting conditions, thus omnipotence is impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say, that it is a trick question. You basically asks if X (Gods ability to make warm toast) is bigger or lesser then Y (Gods ability to hold warm toast). According to Christian thinking X and Y are infinite, and therefor a comparison of these two values is meaningless.
Not quite... If both values are presumed infinite, and it can be shown that one or the other must be greater, then the presumption is false.
If a Christian is stupid enough to try to answer the question, this Christian is an idiot.  :wicked:

Any Christian smart enough to avoid answering knows that any answer would show their god to be limited.

 

Not the kind of thing they ever want to admit to though... :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.