The Concept of Omnipotence Causes Logical Contradictions

omnipotence"the quality of having unlimited power"To get to my final point, I need to start with the question of the origin of the universe. As of right now, there is no scientific explanation as to how the universe came to be. Yes, there is the Big Bang theory, which has been thoroughly vindicated[1], but even that cannot propose what caused the Bang. As far as the theory goes, a singularity either existed for all eternity until it suddenly expanded, or it popped into existence and immediately began to expand. Either way, it seems impossible. Proponents of theism would look at that and say, "How could that possibly happen without something causing it? How could it just happen, with no will behind it? "To which an atheist might respond, "It makes no more sense than your god existing without cause. Something had to make him exist the way he does. "At this point, a theist might say, "God is all-powerful. He willed himself to exist the way he does. ""How could he do that? Deciding something implies that there is a period of time before the decided event takes place. You claim he's existed for all eternity. How could he have decided before the beginning of eternity that he wanted to exist the way he does? And even if he could do that, what willed him to exist in that pre-eternity state where he willed himself to exist in his eternity state? How can something cause itself? Things cannot cause themselves, because to cause something, they need to be in existence, and once they're in existence, something has naturally caused that. ""When you're all powerful, you can transcend logic. Your arguments are invalid. "Now, this conclusion might seem kind of silly, and I'm sure if I allowed my split personalities to keep typing the atheist half would say something to that effect, but it is true. Omnipotence literally denotes unlimited power. If one has unlimited power, one can break the rules of logic. . because they have infinite power. So an omnipotent being can cause itself to exist, because it can say f*ck logic, because it's all powerful. If this is true, then it logically follows that when one is talking about an all powerful being, the odds of chance do not apply. We think of existence beginning in terms of one thing already in existence bringing another into existence. For instance, there is a chance that you will have a baby with another person (if you're a determinist, you would rather say that you either will or will not have a baby, and that you're just unable to determine that outcome as of yet), because you, as an already existing being, might cause another to come into existence, or you might not. This concept is broken by omnipotence; in omnipotence, the caused thing controls the cause. This would be like the baby controlling his parents having sex and fertilizing the egg that becomes him. It doesn't make sense, but when we're dealing with omnipotence, 'sense' can be transcended by infinite power. This fact creates some serious contradictions of logic, which I'll get into now.1) Infinite GodsSo as I pointed out in the baby example, in most instances, there is a chance something will or will not happen. But because an omnipotent being can cause itself to exist, there is a 100% chance that an omnipotent being will exist (if you find yourself outright rejecting this statement, take a moment to think it over). Given this, there would be an infinite number of gods; because they fully control the odds of existence due to omnipotence, they would make themselves exist. There is no chance involved. If we accept the conclusion of my split personalities' argument, it is literally impossible that infinite gods could not do this. This would spawn many problems. If an infinite number of gods is a natural consequence of omnipotence, then it would make sense that there'd be gods opposed to one another. Who wins in a fight? They're both omnipotent. Omnipotence literally dictates power over everything, which would naturally include other gods. Therefore, say, the fire god would have power over the water god. Except, hold on, the water god is omnipotent too, so it has power over all things, therefore, it has complete control over the fire god. This back and forth goes on for infinity. The two gods cannot be equal in power, because being omnipotent means you're all powerful--you have control over all things, including other gods. And yet, the other god is omnipotent too, so it has the same power; having the same powers would denote an equality of powers, but the powers themselves denote supreme power, which denotes having no equal. Wut. Infinite beings each with complete control over each other and yet not is an inherent contradiction of logic.2) Causing Oneself to Not ExistIf infinite gods can exist, then it would naturally follow that some of those gods would be self-destructive. Assuming they're all powerful, then they would be able to cause themselves to not exist, much in the same way that a god causes himself to exist. This causes a problem. How can something will itself to not exist? Would willing something not dictate than an actor be present to will? If there is a will for nonexistence, this necessitates existence. And yet, we've got ourselves an omnipotent being that has caused itself to not exist, without existing. This is clearly a logic contradiction: something causing itself to not exist without ever having existed to do so. If my ideas seem stupid or impossible, it's because they're contradictions in logic. As far as I can tell, the concept of omnipotence and all the possibilities it dictates lead to an unending, unanswerable thought exercise. Thanks for reading. Source:[1] . http://www.schoolsobservatory.org.uk...