Finally!

[jorb]

Because the alternative is meaningless. There is no alternative.

[g1real]

But doesn't that make him not all-powerful, since his very power is limited by his nature? If he was all-powerful, wouldn't he be able to surpass his nature, for better or worse? Or perhaps there would be no need to surpass his nature, since he is all-powerful? If a nature is unsurpassable, is it still considered a nature though? What defines a unsurpassable nature?

(This is so hilariously offtopic though.)

[Vigilance]

my head hurts.

[jorb]

If he was all-powerful, wouldn't he be able to surpass his nature, for better or worse?

If he could do that, would it then not evidently be in his nature to be able to do precisely that? Do you not see the paradox?

If you can transcend your own nature, then that ability is a part of your nature, and thus you cannot.

[g1real]

If he could do that, would it then not evidently be in his nature to be able to do precisely that? Do you not see the paradox?

If you can transcend your own nature, then that ability is a part of your nature, and thus you cannot.

It can't be in your nature to transcend your nature, would that be a thing, then nature would me a meaningless concept. Or are arguing about the semantics on the concept of nature here?

If nature doesn't exist, then it's all a debate on whether something is all-powerful or not, so it comes back to the original argument you tried to fight. Or am I misunderstanding?

[jorb]

It can't be in your nature to transcend your nature, would that be a thing, then nature would me a meaningless concept.

Precisely my point. So why are you asking of God that he be able to?

[g1real]

I'm not asking anything. I'm saying that if he can't, then he's not all powerful. Could he, then he would be able to make nature meaningless. So, he either is not all-powerful, or has no nature.

I wrote a bunch more text, but I was getting this strange urge of tipping hats of specific makings. It scared me a bit, so I'm gonna stop.

[Procne]

I'm not asking anything. I'm saying that if he can't, then he's not all powerful. Could he, then he would be able to make nature meaningless. So, he either is not all-powerful, or has no nature.

If you assume the God exists and that he created the whole universe then everything is in his nature and nothing is outside of it, as he is the creator, and definer, of everything. You, as his creation, are unable to imagine anything outside his nature, as all your knowledge, experience, perception and thoughts are within his nature. And your nature is only a small subset of his nature.

"God, can you create a rock which you would be unable to lift?"
"Have a thunder smartass"
"BZZZZT"

[jorb]

I'm saying that if he can't, then he's not all powerful. Could he, then he would be able to make nature meaningless.

And I am saying that if your conception of "all powerful" also includes "completely devoid of all power" then the concept is, indeed, meaningless. God's allpower can perhaps be better understood as "power of the maximum possible extent", which is not self-contradictory.

Again, your argument rests on demanding a logical fallacy of God.

*tips stetson*