English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is an omnipotent, omnscient being necessarily complex?

2007-10-02 03:06:47 · 11 answers · asked by Eleventy 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

11 answers

Complexity is entirely probable, given certain natural laws. It would even be necessary, I suppose.

However, an omnipotent being would by nature be both complex and not complex because it would encompass everything. The only way something could be omnipotent would be through paradox.

2007-10-02 03:17:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Well, I think you have posed two separate questions.

For the first... I think that complexity does not require design. There have been many cases where lumps of clay have been accidentally formed by rain water and stream action into bowl shapes and then baked in the sun to harden and form a bowl, then birds and insects build homes in them because they were convenient and excreted resins on the surface of the bowl that caused a glaze to make the bowl water tight. Then other bugs and things made zig-zag lines on them that just happened to form a pattern that looked like a design but was just really random wanderings of bugs. And then further baking in the sun hardened those resins into something that looked like porcelain. So, yes, I think random chance can produce lots of things that look like they were created by design.

To your second question. As a bowl, I often think about that potter who made me and think, how odd that a large piece of clay can move like that. Sure he's the potter, but I know that the only thing that exists is clay, so he must be clay too. So clay is not very complex or complicated. How he moves, I don't know but maybe it's some system of pulleys and levers. I agree, no reason to think that a creator would be more complex than his creation.

Hope my examples don't offend you, but I think they illustrate the underlying assumptions that form your questions.

2007-10-02 03:26:36 · answer #2 · answered by William D 5 · 1 0

No to both questions, IMO.

Complexity could and does happen in nature just because of the way it is set up. (Arguably, the way God set it up.)

God is not necessarily complex. As the omnipotent power that is pure love, God is the ultimate simplicity. An undiluted singularity of total love.

2007-10-02 08:25:03 · answer #3 · answered by Acorn 7 · 0 0

People are capable of producing complex stuff (watches as an example) but only up to a certain limit. Humans cannot engineer other humans (ignoring genetic engineering for the sake of argument). This implies that humans must have been created by a superior, more complex being (god). This implicitly implies that god is more complex than us (remember the "God works in mysterious ways" argument). This raises the question: If we are too complex to exist without being created, who created god?

2007-10-02 03:18:23 · answer #4 · answered by qxzqxzqxz 7 · 0 0

I find it amusing that just becasue something is too complex for the human mind to sort out - be think it MUST be from god, or created, because surely a complex thing could NOT have naturally developed.

Not to say it CAN'T come from God either (some of us seem to have THAT all figured out as well!)

Just that it is beyond our poor human understanding.

2007-10-02 03:11:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There is order and chaos in the universe.

This does not mean the Creator has to be both.

Because the Creator is probably something we cant even begin to fathom. For such a complexity and simplicity to exist together without completely negating each other.

2007-10-02 03:11:35 · answer #6 · answered by Antares 6 · 0 1

Absolutely -- too complex to have simply "just happened" without needing to evolve gradually himself.

To borrow from Richard Dawkins, God is "The Ultimate 747" -- a direct refutation of Fred Hoyle's assumption that for life to have spontaneously arisen would have been as unlikely as a tornado blowing through a junkyard and assembling a jumbo jet.

2007-10-02 03:10:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

The comments approximately Australia are loopy. They even have been initially a Gun Nut united states of america and protested while their government had to take them away. in spite of the undeniable fact that, they have not had a mass taking pictures considering that 1992 as a effect and the Australians (even people who protested) will now inform you they experience plenty safer. besides, no longer all weapons have been taken away; human beings nonetheless have looking rifles and if a foul guy or boogie guy broke into your living house, you may nonetheless be waiting to do various harm with a looking rifle. My factor - can we actual desire each and every American to have get right of entry to to device weapons and sniper rifles? can't we restrict particular gun get right of entry to and basically make hand weapons and searching rifles accessible? merely asserting.

2016-12-14 05:34:26 · answer #8 · answered by melaine 4 · 0 0

The answer to this questions seems to be a matter of your knowledge base.

Humans - Yes
Creator of the universe - No

I will bet it is pretty simply to him and that's why we see so much repetition in matter and dark matter.

2007-10-02 03:15:05 · answer #9 · answered by Old guy 5 · 0 0

Pretty simple really. All He want's is love.

2007-10-02 03:10:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers