• tealeapea@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      A million real pics of statues and you gotta bring this AI trash.

      A million quality comments you could have made and you gotta bring this trash comment?

      There’s nothing wrong with my post. People just want to bitch about everything…then when there’s no quality content being posted they will bitch about that too.

    • Pirasp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s no argument against them being god. It is an argument against that gods omnipotence tho. Or more precisely, argument against the very idea of omnipotence.

  • Flumpkin@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Don’t do it… since God is infallible any contradiction would negate all of existence!

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    If Archimedes was god, could he create a world so large that any lever and fulcrum on which to place it would be impossible to move?

    • remotelove@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No? Even if a world could be infinitely large, the statement still remains true. He simply states that “if he had a fulcrum big enough” he could move the world. With him being a god, he could create the fulcrum to always be big enough.

      I am not a math person, but I believe there is a way to define “infinity+1”. There was a numberphile episode where it was possible to have “multiple infinities”, I believe… (“infinity^2” or something? Don’t execute me. I literally have no idea what I am talking about.)