Right; they could host their own shows on Fox News. They know if they continually spout off the same nonsense, that it will stick somewhere.

Was there some confusion? The point is that reality doesn't care what either of us believed. The game's instruction manual says X, so in the context of the game X is true. The Bible says X about God, so in the context of Christianity X is true. Belief is irrelevant.

This is a human condition; why would it upset me? I do it, you do it. You can't get two random people to agree on pizza toppings, ffs.

His point is that, if you're going to argue that Christianity is false (or true), then you need to argue about what the Bible actually says. Not what people claim the Bible says because it makes them comfortable or supports their lifestyle or whatever.

I prefer the TNIV, myself. If you want to do in-depth textual criticism, though, you should probably learn the original languages.

For questions like "does the Bible say God is omnipotent", though, any decent translation will be sufficient.

EDIT:

23 answered much better below.

Eh, not this stupid reasoning either. If you want to mock people who call themselves Christians, then you mock what they believe, regardless of what the Bible says.

But the thing regarding this issue, is that it is not commonly believed that God is omnipotent within Christian circles (especially among scholars and pastors), at least not in the ways they are laughing at here in this thread. So the only thing here that is showing is their ignorance about Christian groups.

Yes, most Christians use the word omnipotent, but you cannot give it your own non-Christian definition and then laugh at it. That's just bogus.

There are so many valid things that you could use to make fun of Christianity. It's simply unnecessary to make something like this up.

You're getting confused. These people here aren't claiming that Jesus or Paul or the Bible taught that God can do contradictory things.

They are claiming that people who call themselves Christians today believe that. Then they mock them. It matters not what the Bible says. And that much of their argument is valid.

Then you come back with some silly statement like, "but they aren't true Christians." Again, that is irrelevant. Nobody on the outside cares if they are "true" or not. The only thing along these lines that's relevant is to say, "I don't believe that." Then they cannot mock you, but they can still justifiably mock other Christians who do.

But in this particular topic, their mocking just shows ignorance over what the majority of Christians actually believe. Yes, Christians will say God is omnipotent, but they will not say he can do everything.

The silliness with the rock example is pointless, because all you have to do is ask "Can God lie?" So the only thing they are left with is to mock how Christians define omnipotence. And at that point, who cares?

When you start making fun of the name given to a doctrine, instead of the doctrine itself, you're obviously in 100% troll mode.

I'm just glad I know that there is no god. I just pity those who spend half their day praying to something that isn't actually there and believing in something that simply does not exist.

Does it? It seems to mean literally "all powerful" which I think is quite different from "able to do anything." And as I've said before, if the literal definition of omnipotence includes contradictory things, then the word ought to be thrown out of the dictionary, because you could never possibly attribute the word to anything.

But obviously that part is just a debate on semantics, like you have said.

In what context is omnipotence used in the scientific world? I'm pretty sure it stems mostly from a religious context...

It's understandable that a non-Christian person may be confused by the Christian doctrine of omnipotence. It's not understandable to continually pretend you've never heard about what it really means, continuing to spread nonsense Fox News style.

It is that simple. People are not. People argue endlessly about this, but they argue endlessly about everything. You can't show me a Bible that doesn't say God can't lie. You can say otherwise, and I respect your right to an opinion. But thinking otherwise is about as effective as that guy thinking he could do super moves in MvC3 with qcfqcf+P. He can think what he likes. Beliefs are irrelevant.

I've always felt the hyperbole is built into this word, since nothing can make a rock so big it can't lift it and still be omnipotent. God is, for all practical intents and purposes, omnipotent. Is he literally? No. But we assume you're smart enough to figure out what we mean.

The key combinations in the game are falsifyable. What the Bible says about God is not. Non-belief in those key combinations can be countered simply by demonstrating that they work. Non-belief in God cannot be countered this way.

Are you incapable of reading it for some reason? Or are you misunderstanding this entire discussion?

Let's try a similar example. Can you easily verify from The Lord of the Rings that Frodo was the ringbearer? Is this falsifiable?

Able to do anything is literally what it says in my dictionary here. Regardless, omnipotens is from omnia ("all") and potens, which comes from posse "to be able to", either litterally or figuratively ("to be empowered to", "to be capable of"). I suppose one could pick either translation, but there is no difference between those two meanings in the original (I'm not actually sure how they're supposed to be different though).

Almost (but that doesn't mean you shouldn't specify what it means), but I think it can be used (or was historically used) in the meaning of "having supreme authority", for instance to describe a king or a dictator. You could, of course, apply that meaning directly to God - with the caveat that it will confuse the issue if people interpret it to mean "all powerful".
Perhaps that is the original statement: God as ultimate sovereign, with dominion over all. Perhaps it was intended to be understood in both ways, as a praise (and a pun at the same time).

I always think Jesus thought the same thing when he told people to not be frightened of God because deep down he loved them as a father...

Maybe. Modern day Christianity definitely has distinct doctrines: God's Sovereignty and God's Omnipotence. There's actually little disagreement on what omnipotence means, but what his sovereignty includes is a widely debated topic.