The paradox of the stone is a valid refutation of God.

Thank you, vmpire321, for your response. 1. Definition of Omnipotence The first problem here is that my opponent introduces the Bible as an authoritative source, even though it has not been established that we are debating only about the Christian God. Secondly, the Bible verses provided don't support my opponent's assumption that an omnipotent God must have the ability to break logic. It only establishes that, as my opponent accurately summarized, "can do anything that he wishes to," but there is quite simply no conceivable situation in which he would ever wish to create a stone that he could not lift, making the entire paradox irrelevant. For example, God does not wish to lie, and is thus incapable of lying [1]. He is also immutable [2], not able to change himself because he doees not wish to change himself. Therefore, God is, as Stanford put it, "essentially omnipotent," in that he cannot make himself non-omnipotent [3]. Additionally, my opponent might point to some other verses of the Bible that claim something along the lines of, "Anything is possible with God," and claim that this includes the logically impossible. However, I argue that there is an implied addendum of "as dictated by logic" with any such sentence, much in the same way that when I say, "I will be attending Rice this fall," I actually mean, "I will be attending Rice this fall, unless Rice explodes, I die, I enter a coma, I get arrested, I have a religious epiphany after which higher learning is unacceptable, I have a great business idea that requires me to drop out, I get kidnapped, I get amnesia, I get deserted on an island, I decide to stay in Jamaica forever, I become way too obsessed with StarCraft, I discover that I'm a mutant and attend Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters, or any of an incredibly large number of alternative yet on the whole unlikely scenarios." After all, what would be the point of the term "omnipotent" if it could only describe something that absolutely cannot exist, not even in fiction? 2. Application of Logic to God Sure, the paradox is different, but if humans can present a situation that brings logic to its knees, even if it requires particular conditions (half of which are laws of logic), what chance does it stand against an omniscient God? My opponent's reasoning regarding jumping off a cliff is purely inductive reasoning, which is actually logically fallacious if ever used to make an absolute statement [4]. My opponent accurately restates the omnipotence paradox as, "Is God capable of being incapable?" However, as God would not wish to be incapable, he needn't have the power to make himself incapable. 3. Relevance of Omnipotence The verses my opponent provided are not scientifically proven, nor do they establish the level of omnipotence (specifically, the ability to defy logic) that my opponent requires God to have the slightest chance of affirming the resolution. Wikipedia lists common attributes of God, including omnipotence, but these attributes aren't necessary, nor must they be defined as my opponent wishes them to be defined. After all, even having the ability to defeat anything in combat can fulfill some definitions of omnipotence. To conclude, while my opponent makes some accurate points, she is still no closer to affirming the resolution than before. Back to you, vmpire321. Good luck. 1. http://bible.cc... Hebrews 6:18: "God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged." 2. http://bible.org... Malachi 3:6: "For I, the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed." Psalms 119:89: "God is immutable in His attributes." 3. http://plato.stanford.edu... 4. http://onegoodmove.org...