Is there anything that God cannot do?

[Sexton Blake]

The old answer is; can God make a rock that he cannot lift.

 

A better answer is that God cannot show himself to anyone.

 

We look as we do because we were evolved to live on Earth, its atmosphere, its gravity, its solar radiation, etc.

 

In a short story I wrote, someone meets God and just for a moment, he sees God in his true form. Something weird and horrible, something not remotely human.

 

Of course, the real reason is that he does not exist.

[Guest TheTruthWillSetYouFree]

To understand this question, first you have to understand the basics about God. 

It's very simple: God can do anything that's not impossible, which, of course, is a reasonable conclusion for an infinite Being such as Him. So, we know there are things that God can't do. For instance, He can't create a rock so big He can't lift it. Why? A rock that He can't lift would have to be more than infinitely heavy, which is impossible, since infinity excludes all boundaries, and nothing can be "bigger" than infinity in any way. God is infinite, meaning he can't create a rock more than infinitely heavy, since that is a logical contradiction, and is therefore impossible. You can't expect a mathematician to create a triangle with four sides, or a circle with corners, because this is just as impossible. Since we can't blame a mathematician for his inability to create a logical contradiction, why should we blame God for his inability to do what's impossible? 

To find God, you have to know where to look. You can't say God hasn't shown Himself to mankind unless you can prove that He hasn't, which you can't. Also, if God has never shown Himself to us, how can you explain the many supernatural events that have occurred over the years? For some interesting reads (with pictures!) of God doing the impossible, see this article: 

https://osvnews.com/2021/09/10/do-you-doubt-the-real-presence-learn-about-these-eucharistic-miracles/

Make sure to read the whole thing. It's incredible.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

For with God nothing shall be impossible.

Luke 1:37

 

And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.

Luke 18:27

 

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26

 

And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Mark 10:27

 

Good try, though. @TheTruthWillSetYouFree

[TABA]

30 minutes ago, TheTruthWillSetYouFree said:

You can't say God hasn't shown Himself to mankind unless you can prove that He hasn't, which you can't.

“You can’t say Zeus hasn’t shown himself to mankind unless you can prove that he hasn’t, which you can’t”

 

 

[Astreja]

2 hours ago, TheTruthWillSetYouFree said:

To understand this question, first you have to understand the basics about God. 

It's very simple: God can do anything that's not impossible, which, of course, is a reasonable conclusion for an infinite Being such as Him. So, we know there are things that God can't do. For instance, He can't create a rock so big He can't lift it. Why? A rock that He can't lift would have to be more than infinitely heavy, which is impossible, since infinity excludes all boundaries, and nothing can be "bigger" than infinity in any way. God is infinite, meaning he can't create a rock more than infinitely heavy, since that is a logical contradiction, and is therefore impossible. You can't expect a mathematician to create a triangle with four sides, or a circle with corners, because this is just as impossible. Since we can't blame a mathematician for his inability to create a logical contradiction, why should we blame God for his inability to do what's impossible? 

To find God, you have to know where to look. You can't say God hasn't shown Himself to mankind unless you can prove that He hasn't, which you can't. Also, if God has never shown Himself to us, how can you explain the many supernatural events that have occurred over the years? For some interesting reads (with pictures!) of God doing the impossible, see this article: 

https://osvnews.com/2021/09/10/do-you-doubt-the-real-presence-learn-about-these-eucharistic-miracles/

Make sure to read the whole thing. It's incredible.

 

Cool story, bro.  Needs more dragons.

 

And evidence that this hypothetical god-thing of yours actually exists, before you start telling us what it can or cannot do.

 

Why should we bother trying to prove that your imaginary friend doesn't exist?  Believing that it doesn't exist is quite sufficient for my needs.

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

For with God nothing shall be impossible.

Luke 1:37

 

And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.

Luke 18:27

 

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26

 

And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Mark 10:27

 

Good try, though. @TheTruthWillSetYouFree

 

You took dat universal statement outta context!

[midniterider]

6 hours ago, TheTruthWillSetYouFree said:

 

To find God, you have to know where to look. You can't say God hasn't shown Himself to mankind unless you can prove that He hasn't, which you can't. Also, if God has never shown Himself to us, how can you explain the many supernatural events that have occurred over the years?

 

You set the bar very low for what you believe to be evidence of God's existence. Probably because, in your heart of hearts you know he isn't real. 

 

"You have to know where to look." Ok where do I look? Why don't you just tell me instead of playing silly games?

 

I can't say God hasnt shown himself to mankind unless I can prove that he hasnt? I can say the same thing about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, who by the way was responsible for the many supernatural events that have occurred over the years. Praise his Noodley Goodness. 

 

[Joshpantera]

14 hours ago, TheTruthWillSetYouFree said:

God is infinite, meaning he can't create a rock more than infinitely heavy, since that is a logical contradiction, and is therefore impossible. You can't expect a mathematician to create a triangle with four sides, or a circle with corners, because this is just as impossible. Since we can't blame a mathematician for his inability to create a logical contradiction, why should we blame God for his inability to do what's impossible? 

 

In biblical times you may have been stoned to death for contradicting the written scripture about god: 

 

13 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

For with God nothing shall be impossible.

Luke 1:37

 

And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.

Luke 18:27

 

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26

 

And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Mark 10:27

 

Good try, though. @TheTruthWillSetYouFree

 

This is a working demonstration of a transparent lack of faith by a so-called christian believer. The christian thinks that they know better than the bible and need to change what is written to meet their own personal sensibility. 

 

 

All we have to do is check the claim against the bible to see whether or not the claim is biblical, therefore christian in the first place...

 

[freshstart]

Hey there @theTruthwillsetyoufree,

how about an introduction? Tell us a little about yourself and why you're here. You seem to imply, like many other humans, that you're an authority on God. Why should you be believed over all the other humans that disagree with you?

You are Catholic, correct?

[Myrkhoos]

35 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

 

In biblical times you may have been stoned to death for contradicting the written scripture about god: 

 

 

This is a working demonstration of a transparent lack of faith by a so-called christian believer. The christian thinks that they know better than the bible and need to change what is written to meet their own personal sensibility. 

 

 

All we have to do is check the claim against the bible to see whether or not the claim is biblical, therefore christian in the first place...

 

I beg to differ. The Bible was NEVER supposed to be self explanatory nor sufficient despite what many protestants believe. Most traditional Jews and Christians believe in the written tradition but also in an accompanying oral tradition. Jews have the Talmud aka oral Torah.

   So what "impossible" means in that context was always open to explanation and detail. Impossible does not need to mean what it means in common usage. 

   This is just a historical fact - look up the many interpretations the Bible gets. There may be ONE Bible in form( and there are differences in form), but MANY bibles in content people get from it.

   So you cannot check what someone says with the "Bible" , just an interpretation of it. That much still remains from my Orthodox teaching. There is only an interpretation shared within a community, that is why the community has primacy, not the written text.

     So the Church is actually the living breathing body of Christ and the dwelling of the Holy Spirit, the Bible and all other things being a product from the community for the community if you want to put in Christian theological terms.

   Sola Scriptura is ahistorical. From the time of the earliest Jews up until now, the text only has meaning inside an interpretative framework of the community.

 

[Myrkhoos]

About the topic, yeah divine hiddenness seems kind of odd. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

18 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

I beg to differ.

Actually, what this shows is just how untrustworthy the christian religion is.  What you have presented is the Eastern Orthodox view of scripture.  But in much of  Western christianity, scripture is seen as the inherent and infallible word of god.  So, there is a major difference, not only in interpretation, but also in how authoritative the bible is.  If christians themselves cannot agree on the reliability of their own holy book, why should anybody else trust what it says?  Now, you'd think an omniscient god would have foreseen this and set up some kind of failsafe to prevent it.  But since omniscience is impossible, I guess god couldn't do it. 

[TABA]

3 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Actually, what this shows is just how untrustworthy the christian religion is.

This, exactly.  Although I’m glad they both ended up here with us, @Joshpantera and @Myrkhoos inherited quite different versions of Christianity, by accident of birth.  The former was born into a community of Seventh Day Adventists in Florida, while the latter (correct me if I’m wrong, sir) popped his head out in Romania, a land of Orthodox Christianity.  One of the few things these two belief systems have in common is their use of the word Christian.  Rather careless of a divinity to allow his message to become so divergent, especially with so much presumably at stake. 

[Joshpantera]

45 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

I beg to differ. The Bible was NEVER supposed to be self explanatory nor sufficient despite what many protestants believe. Most traditional Jews and Christians believe in the written tradition but also in an accompanying oral tradition.

 

Yes, we understand that christians disagree on just about everything including the bible. But that doesn't get us anywhere. 

 

29 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Actually, what this shows is just how untrustworthy the christian religion is.  What you have presented is the Eastern Orthodox view of scripture.  But in much of  Western christianity, scripture is seen as the inherent and infallible word of god.  So, there is a major difference, not only in interpretation, but also in how authoritative the bible is.  If christians themselves cannot agree on the reliability of their own holy book, why should anybody else trust what it says?  Now, you'd think an omniscient god would have foreseen this and set up some kind of failsafe to prevent it.  But since omniscience is impossible, I guess god couldn't do it.

 

This is what it boils down to. 

 

So we can rope the apologist and eastern orthodox thinkers into the same boat in that way. Both are subjectively declaring what god is or is not in contradiction of the written scriptures that dominate western christianity. That leaves us with a situation where, first of all, if they're right then the bible is wrong. And if that's the case, then no one can really know anything about god aside from the subjective claims of individual christian communities, which, all disagree and differ with each other. 

 

The shovel comes out and the hole gets deeper and deeper the more the excuses and apologetics start flying. 

[midniterider]

1 hour ago, Joshpantera said:

 

In biblical times you may have been stoned to death for contradicting the written scripture about god: 

 

 

This is a working demonstration of a transparent lack of faith by a so-called christian believer. The christian thinks that they know better than the bible and need to change what is written to meet their own personal sensibility. 

 

 

All we have to do is check the claim against the bible to see whether or not the claim is biblical, therefore christian in the first place...

 

 

Catholics would have needed some conversion therapy in the Pentecostal church I attended back in the day.

[midniterider]

Jesus can you write us a message to let us know if we should believe the Pentecostal church teachings or the Catholic church teaching? Until then I'll just remain agnostic. Jesus? Hello?

[Myrkhoos]

15 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Yes, we understand that christians disagree on just about everything including the bible. But that doesn't get us anywhere. 

 

 

This is what it boils down to. 

 

So we can rope the apologist and eastern orthodox thinkers into the same boat in that way. Both are subjectively declaring what god is or is not in contradiction of the written scriptures that dominate western christianity. That leaves us with a situation where, first of all, if they're right then the bible is wrong. And if that's the case, then no one can really know anything about god aside from the subjective claims of individual christian communities, which, all disagree and differ with each other. 

 

The shovel comes out and the hole gets deeper and deeper the more the excuses and apologetics start flying. 

    Historically speaking, I still believe the Orthodox were right in how early Jews/ Christians viewed and used the Bible. Modern protestant Christianity is a child of the printring press in a way:). Thus is not a theological argument, just that early communities based a high value on interpretation by authority/community, not private reading, like most religious traditions with a sacred scripture. 

     I think you can make a purely historical argument that the Bible was not written or used as sola scriptura tradition , but for a tiny minority. I mean even the New Testament is filled with references on the right and wrong way to interpret Scripture.

[Joshpantera]

7 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

Historically speaking, I still believe the Orthodox were right in how early Jews/ Christians viewed and used the Bible. Modern protestant Christianity is a child of the printring press in a way:).

 

I probably agree with you. I tend to side with Richard Carrier and Earl Doherty at lot of the way concerning christian origins. But in that way, the catholics and eastern orthodox merely represent traditions that survived the esoteric traditions that may have been the oldest and most accurate. Those early esoteric traditions no doubt were metaphorical in nature and not strict to scripture any more so than a platform from which to mythologize with metaphor. 

 

But then the exoteric traditions outlived them by force and other means. Dumbing down the esoteric symbolism for exoteric mass preaching and proselytizing. Which brings us to the protestant reformation. When the protestants got a hold of scripture directly, they hardly understood the first thing about what they were looking at nor it's murky origins including oral traditions. No doubt whatever oral traditions that the eastern orthodox think they have, couldn't possibly date back to anything historical in nature. Especially not when the historicity of the myths is in such question due to the absence of concrete evidence in support of any of it. 

 

If anyone believes the bible is true, then we have to argue based on that premise. 

 

If anyone believes that the bible isn't literally true, but YHWH and jesus are true anyways, we have to argue based on that premise. 

 

If anyone believes that the bible isn't literally true, there is no YHWH and jesus, we have to argue based on that premise. 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

23 hours ago, midniterider said:

Jesus can you write us a message to let us know if we should believe the Pentecostal church teachings or the Catholic church teaching? Until then I'll just remain agnostic. Jesus? Hello?

 

Yes, son, I hear you. 

 

I'll be speaking through the mouthpiece of Joshpantera, whom represents Yeshua Ben Pantera, one of the many historical figures that went into making the gospel myths about me. I never was incarnate as one fixed historical person on the earth. Rather, I am a celestial being who "appeared" in vision to various people. And whom has been greatly mythologized akin to the ancient solar mysteries of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. 

 

To answer your question, son, none who exist today represent my teachings. My teachings have been lost to time. 

 

PS

 

That bit about me returning is pure fantasy. The world is on its own as far as that goes.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

18 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

Yes, son, I hear you. 

 

[Myrkhoos]

6 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

I probably agree with you. I tend to side with Richard Carrier and Earl Doherty at lot of the way concerning christian origins. But in that way, the catholics and eastern orthodox merely represent traditions that survived the esoteric traditions that may have been the oldest and most accurate. Those early esoteric traditions no doubt were metaphorical in nature and not strict to scripture any more so than a platform from which to mythologize with metaphor. 

 

But then the exoteric traditions outlived them by force and other means. Dumbing down the esoteric symbolism for exoteric mass preaching and proselytizing. Which brings us to the protestant reformation. When the protestants got a hold of scripture directly, they hardly understood the first thing about what they were looking at nor it's murky origins including oral traditions. No doubt whatever oral traditions that the eastern orthodox think they have, couldn't possibly date back to anything historical in nature. Especially not when the historicity of the myths is in such question due to the absence of concrete evidence in support of any of it. 

I'm not saying that the Catholics or Eastern Orthodox are right in HOW they interpret it, just that their METHOD seems more of a historical reality. For Christians and Jews of all ages.

6 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

If anyone believes the bible is true, then we have to argue based on that premise. 

 

If anyone believes that the bible isn't literally true, but YHWH and jesus are true anyways, we have to argue based on that premise. 

 

If anyone believes that the bible isn't literally true, there is no YHWH and jesus, we have to argue based on that premise. 

 

 

I understand that and I agree that you should argue on the premise on hand.

You can't argue with a baptist about the literal presence of Jesus as blood and body in the Eucharist, nor can you argue with an Orthodox about how the KJV is innerantbin every detail, infailible, sufficient and self evident for Christian faith and practice.

[Joshpantera]

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

I understand that and I agree that you should argue on the premise on hand.

You can't argue with a baptist about the literal presence of Jesus as blood and body in the Eucharist, nor can you argue with an Orthodox about how the KJV is innerantbin every detail, infailible, sufficient and self evident for Christian faith and practice.

 

So do you think this catholic boy (I'm assuming youth in this one) is justified as a catholic to blatantly contradict the gospel writers very specific claims about god? 

 

On 1/12/2022 at 5:55 PM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

For with God nothing shall be impossible.

Luke 1:37

 

And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.

Luke 18:27

 

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26

 

And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Mark 10:27

 

Gospels say the above, in clear context, time and again. What seesm impossible to human beings, is possible for god according to the mythology of the gospel tradition.

 

Look at that closely impossible to the minds of men = possible for god regardless of what men can conceive of. 

 

Then a catholic boy comes along in the 21st century making this claim: 

 

On 1/12/2022 at 5:24 PM, TheTruthWillSetYouFree said:

God is infinite, meaning he can't create a rock more than infinitely heavy, since that is a logical contradiction, and is therefore impossible. You can't expect a mathematician to create a triangle with four sides, or a circle with corners, because this is just as impossible. Since we can't blame a mathematician for his inability to create a logical contradiction, why should we blame God for his inability to do what's impossible? 

 

Is there any tradition, written or oral, which claims that there's such a thing as "impossible" for god? Is there anything that suggests that logical contraditions for men = impossible for god? 

[Myrkhoos]

16 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

So do you think this catholic boy (I'm assuming youth in this one) is justified as a catholic to blatantly contradict the gospel writers very specific claims about god? 

 

 

Gospels say the above, in clear context, time and again. What seesm impossible to human beings, is possible for god according to the mythology of the gospel tradition.

 

Look at that closely impossible to the minds of men = possible for god regardless of what men can conceive of. 

 

Then a catholic boy comes along in the 21st century making this claim: 

 

 

Is there any tradition, written or oral, which claims that there's such a thing as "impossible" for god? Is there anything that suggests that logical contraditions for men = impossible for god? 

God cannot do things that contradict his nature, because that would be sin , separation from God. God cannot make a stone so heavy he cannot lift because that would contradict his nature as all powerful. God cannot transform into something God isn't. Like the Trinity cannot separate into three Gods.

     Again, you say " the Gospel plainly says". There is no such thing. The Gospel does not "plainly" say anything. A protestant leftover perhaps?

    Saint Symeon the new theologian said the it is the Holy Spirit that inspired the Scriptures, only the Holy Spirit can interpret them. The Orthodox church considers the living church as an abode of the Holy Spirit with sole authority to interpret Scripture. In the eyes of the Orthodox church anyone reading the Scriptures outside the Church is misreading them. You have a veil of darkness preventing you from understanding like some Jews. The Scriptures are not just like a historical text, or novel, or a human creation, it is divinely inspired inside a community of believers. Do you understand now why for an Orthodox if you come and say - X dogma contradicts Scripture - they do not even need to consider your position? Only minds illuminated by the Holy Spirit, of which you are not, can say anything meaningful about the Scriptures. You are wrong from the getgo. You are wrong for even attempting to read Scripture without the guidance of the Church.  That is evidence you are proud and possibly, influenced by the devil.

    Let me simplify this. In Eastern Orthodoxy, basically, there is no Bible, there is the Church, of which the Bible is only a part  The end. 

     Edit. So from an Eastern Orthodox position, the Church is justified to say anything about Scripture, and it is YOU who is NOT justified to even have an opinion. 

      Justified in another way? It depends, what standard are you using?        So if you want to argue with an Orthodox, and maybe Catholics, it is more useful to argue from first principles and/or Church official catechism than the Bible.At most the Church Fathers. My two cents.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

So we're back to god obviously can not just say what he means and has to have fallible humans interpret for him.  In this case, the Orthodox church.  Or, in other words, guys like this:

 

 

[Joshpantera]

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

The Gospel does not "plainly" say anything.

 

I've quoted the plain words. It says over and over that what seems impossible to the minds of men is not impossible for god. So the Orthodox church is made up of men and the minds of men. They couldn't possibly make any declaration as to what is or is not possible for a god who according to the creeds is immanent and transcendent, and omni across the board. Do the eastern Orthodox ignore all of the creeds as well as what is written in plain text in the gospel tradition?