Could an omnipotent being create a rock so heavy that even that being couldn’t lift it?
no.
if omnipotence has any rational meaning, then the being it applies to must have all the power in all possible situations. The omnipotent being could not create a situation where he did have all the power, or he would contradict his own nature.
If you allow the omnipotent being to contradict his own nature, then since the being now has no rationally understandable identity you might as well not give him any properties at all. You would make just as much sense if you said he was powerless, smells kinda pink or he is a mediocre boxer with a fghgffghgf.
But, if a being is omnipotent, he must be able to do all things, including creating a situation in which he can be overwhelmed. Paradox, no?
ReignofUtopia wrote:
Definetely a paradox, but definetely not an impossible one. Having all power, means having power at all degrees. But this is an absolute, and though it contains all lower powers as well as high, the absolute nature of the higher(or having all) power makes for the possibility of this paradox, wherein it appears as two opposite possibilities can exist at the same time. If this being is all powerful, then it has the power to do that. It has the ability to not be power and all powerful at the same time, if it so chooses. Its obvious, that this being having all power, would inevitably have different aspects or representations of the different degrees of power, which make up the entire whole.
Because a being is omnipotent, does it have the power to choose?
A being that is omnipotent already knows the outcome of each choice, the omipotent being already knew which choice he would choose before he ever chose it. Therefore is it really a choice? If it isn’t, then the omnipotent being inevitably will do all things, including deny its own omnipotence, which is the paradox. If the being can deny its own omnipotence, then it is not omnipotent, the being already proved that he wasn’t because he created a situation in which he could be defeated. In that case, how can anything be omnipotent if it isn’t omnipotent?
ReignOfUtopia wrote:
Of course, its a power.
It would still be considered a choice, from our limited perspective yes. But regardless, the rest of your comment applies to the omnipotent being, it still can and will if it wishes to do all things, including this denying of its own omnipotence. This is where what I was saying about the different aspects of the omnipotent being has to come into play. The being in itself being omnipotent, has the power to also have aspects of itself as being powerless or containing less power. But taken as a whole, this being still has omnipotence. More importantly, without this ability to be omnipotent and not omnipotent at the same time, it couldnt be omnipotent at all. So its a standard of its omnipotence to also be able to not be omnipotent at the same time.
Or you could look at it like this…
The omnipotent being has all power to create a universe which contains hierarchies of power within it, but still exist outside this universe completely in itself omnipotent.
being able to “do all things” is not in his definition, however “having all the power” is.
An omnipotent being understands that He created all things as part of Creation.
A
If you cannot ‘do all things’ you do not ‘have all the power’, because, obviously, you haven’t the power to do all things!
There is very little wiggle room for apologists on this one, so they generally just rationalize and/or ignore it.
(or give nonsensicle answers that don’t address the question as the previous poster did.)
ReignofUtopia:
Yes and No. The problem with such a question is that the assumed argument behind it is internally inconsistent. If a being is omnipotent, then a rock too heavy for that being to lift cannot exist – by the definition of omnipotence being used. If such a rock did or does exist, then that inherently precludes the being from maintaining omnipotence in the first place.
But to put this question and all of the arguments in this thread to rest: Logicians have come to the conclusion that omnipotence, as normatively used in discussions similar to this one are inaccurate, and is used, such that: said being can do all things that said being can do. If we are speaking about a particular being: “Godâ€, then we state that God can do all things within God’s power.
Not at all. You have assumed that the impossible can be overcome by power. This is not the case though, things are impossible by the logical shape of the world, and so although God could change the logical shape of things, he could not perform the impossible within those bounds while maintaining them.
Although I point everyone to my original post, I will digress for the sake of edification.
Nothing can ever be logically impossible unless the concept of “within reason” and “logic” are being conflated and an ambiguity fallacy is being utilized either coherently or incoherently. So whether the world is shaped logically or not, which is just an assumption in the first place, holds no bearing on possibility.
Oh…so god is omnipotent, but only within the context of human logic.
Gotcha!
Keep on wiggling.
Not wiggling, just the stating the facts. ‘Human logic’ describes all possible experience (it is the only context there is). If God wants to affect that experience (act in the universe), then he must either destroy those logical bounds or work within them.
I would really like to see you support this assertion.
I supose god too, can only have experiences within the confines of human logic? If not, your argument kinda evaporates, doesn’t it.
Describe a possible experience that would break a logical law and I’ll happily accept otherwise. Of course, logic determines what is possible in the first place.
This is not trickery though, it is just how the world is arranged: in a logically understandable way. Either you accept this (its pretty self evident to me), or you must cease talking about the world at all (or god for that matter, you can make no rational discourse about an irrational being, as i said earlier).
God can experience anything he likes, just as long as it is not both: a) within our experience too, and b) illogical. If God breaks both conditions a) and b) at once then he will destroy rationality (the logical laws are descriptive, so if something defies that description then it is voided).
what is so hard about saying that he can create rocks up to infinity and he can move rocks up to infinity? omnipotence is infinite power.
dr satan seems to be suggesting that god is not bound by ideas like infinity? or the continuity of numbers? these are mere human constructs?
surely in the strange land where god can be said to exist, there might not be numbers. but in places where there are rocks that weigh and forces that force god is going to be bound by the numerical values of those things.
you cant have a rock that weighs something besides a number nor a force with a value of ___ newtons without that blank being filled with a number. and if its numbers, then either there is a limit on the force god can create and there is a limit on the rock he can make or there isnt. if there is a limit, he isnt omnipotent. if there isnt a limit to either, then he literally cant make a rock he cant move. because thats how numbers work.
if you think our idea of numbers and their relationship to rocks and forces are merely a product of subjective human experience, id like to know what isnt.
by the way who cares? even if this was an unsolvable paradox, not only does it not disprove god, it doesnt even disprove his practical omnipotence in all the ways that matter to our experience. it disproves his adherence to the laws of numbers, and proves our inability to imagine what he is doing, or what it even looks like when he does it.
If an omnipotent being existed, he could make the rock too large to lift, then make himself more omnipotent than the rock he just created.
or an omnipotent all knowing god, could simply move the rock with his mind, instead of might. It would take a fraction of power to move the same size rock in an environment where weight matters less.
your god then cancels himself out. If he lives in a place unaffected by numbers, than his ominpotence is unmeasurable. Of course trying to contemplate infinity is like trying to squeeze an orange into an apple.
you cant be half pregnant. you are or arent. i believe your first use of the word omnipotent would more accurately be “quasipotent” or “semipotent” which also describe me and you.
well in his land without numbers, he may not be omnipotent, as that word may have no meaning as there are no degrees of power or units of measure.
but that being true doesnt prevent his effect on this universe from being omnipotent. just because i cant drown chipmunks outside the aquarium in the air (since drowning a chipmunk in the air doesnt even make sense) doesnt mean i cant do it in an aquarium full of sulphuric acid.
Thats actually a hobby of mine. I occasionally use mice though, chipmunks are more expensive.
What Future Man says is correct. This however is golden:
ANY attempt to say that something is beyond human understanding is equivelent to saying it is nonsense, or rather, it is equivelent to putting your underpants on your head, sticking two pencils up your nose and saying “wubble”.