On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 12:24:22PM -0500, John Klein <zarkon at illrepute.org> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Matthew Hunter wrote: > @> > From the point of view of a religious scholar, though, that's not an > @> > acceptable solution; basically, the tension arises from the following set > @> > of statements: > @> I'm not a religious scholar. > @> I want a logical solution to the paradox and I don't care if God > @> dies as a result. > I am perplexed; it seems to me that the paradox only exists if you accept > the existance of God in the first place. Or omnipotence. > If you don't believe in the > existance of God, then the series of statements as shown is perfectly OK > with you. It's only the people that do believe that care about producing > arguments as to why God can or cannot create certain types of rocks. > (Well, them and people that just like arguing.) I would fit in the latter category. -- Matthew Hunter (matthew at infodancer.org) Public Key: http://matthew.infodancer.org/public_key.txt Homepage: http://matthew.infodancer.org/index.jsp Politics: http://www.triggerfinger.org/index.jsp