Omnipotence Paradox and God's Limitations

[Rational Agnostic]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

 

[ManSinha]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

That is the trouble with invoking a transactional God - the very simple question I have is - did god know what Eve was going to do? Your argument fits that conundrum well. If one says well it was free choice - then why punish for exercising the choice? Another said it was disobedience - in that case the creator should have known that the creation would disobey and make contingency plans heck even Batman does.

 

[Firemorphic]

"Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent

The only thing logically incoherent is the question itself (which also assumes an omnipotent god of being in the same category as a created thing, such as a person - which categorically contradicts the subject in the first place.)
Once you work on better questions, then we can talk about what is and isn't "logically incoherent"

 

[Firemorphic]

Also, if we take this question into the realm of Advaita Vedanta, then your question gets really, really interesting

 

[74x12]

If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature.

Does that really make sense?

If I said God is truth. God is reality. Then a lie would contradict Him. So if God is truth He may not accept a lie. That's why I believe God cannot deny Himself. That's the one thing He can't do.

You make the flawed assumption that since God cannot alter His own nature therefore He is beholden to a higher power than Himself. Why can't God be beholden to Himself? Explain why not.

 

[shmogie]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

Hmmmm. There is no paradox. First, the discipline of logic exists to test particular propositions, not to determine truth.

Thus your term ¨logically incoherent ¨ is meaningless.

God is quite logical, and the rules of logic make Him so.

What is the concept of omnipotence you speak of ? Who developed it, and why do you believe it applies to God ?

Why do you think God would have any desire to alter his nature, and while we are at it, what do you mean by nature ?

Methinks you have come up with some sophistry that is quite flashy, but logically and linguistically is a puffball.

 

[BSM1]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

I believe that most people have trouble with this concept because they see "God" (and everything else) as a duality. In other words they are trying to say there is "God" and then there is something that is "not God". Your question concerning the heavy rock can simply be answered with "yes"...and "no"..when you can see "God" as a singularity (which begs the question because we can only think in opposites in that singularity as opposed to a duality). God, by definition, has to be both...and neither.

 

[Thief]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

so in the making of reality......laws are made
for that reality to remain firm(ament).......no twisting of law allowed

try stepping off a high ledge with the expectation the angels will catch you

 

[osgart]

I wouldnt be after a God who gets walked all over, and stabbed in the back by what God creates.

I wouldnt seek a God that changes his own nature, and then starts doing evil.

No one would be free of will, if they had no choice in the matter of choosing good or evil. Evil is Not at all beneficial to life. Evil is a created will that hates doing good. I am not a robot, or automaton but am a living creature. Thus God's will is that every living creature choose good, and never evil, ever! I am not after a God that accepts murderers of innocent beings.

God not being a new creature being, always was, and always will be truly good natured and need not make any choices on the matter. Nor would God be tempted to be evil. Evil runs contrary to life and its love.

I can right imagine what a perfect and truly free God is and does, never changing.

Why would God oppose God's self and change his nature? That makes absolutely no sense!

I dont have a problem with God's nature. However i dont see any omnipotence going on. Omniscience is a tall order even for a God.

So God isnt going to do what logically doesnt serve life purposes.

 

[MJFlores]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?
Yes he can but he won't do it.

What are God's limitations?
He cannot lie and cannot change .

 

[Deeje]

An "Almighty" Being with limitations......who said? Someone who has limitations and assumes that the Creator has them too? Why?

 

[wellwisher]

Lifting a rock assumes against a gravitational field vector. The term heavy is connected to the gravitational force; g, times the mass.

That being said, say I lifted a rock in empty space within a center of gravity. Here is there is no weight and no gravitational vector. Technically no rock of any size or weight can be lifted in this situation, since lifted, pushed/pulled and dropped all become relative terms. God would simply use his omniscience to figure out this trick, using laws of physics, while not having to change anything other than his reference location.

 

[BSM1]

so in the making of reality......laws are made
for that reality to remain firm(ament).......no twisting of law allowed

try stepping off a high ledge with the expectation the angels will catch you

Exactly. This is what I call our "concrete illusion". We can believe anything we want, but like you said rules are rules..

 

[whirlingmerc]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

God cannot lie.
God is true to his character
If you want to call that a limitation, it's semantical

 

[BSM1]

God cannot lie.
God is true to his character
If you want to call that a limitation, it's semantical

Nor can God tell the truth. This is also viewing "God" as a duality. Your statement "God cannot lie..." assumes that there is a God that tells the truth and something else...a lie that God can't tell. For God to be omnipotent there has to be "God" and nothing else; everything has to be God. Anything else and you're creating God in your image.

 

[WalterTrull]

How many angels on the head of a pin??

 

[ChristineM]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?" No matter how the question is answered, the result is that an omnipotent being is logically incoherent and thus cannot exist. So, if God exists, he could not be omnipotent in the technical sense, since the concept of omnipotence produces a paradox. The next question is: What are God's limitations? C.S. Lewis and many other apologists claim that God cannot do the logically impossible. But this then means that God is subservient to the laws of logic, and thus the laws of logic are above God. Other apologists claim that logic is part of God's nature, and God cannot alter his nature. This begs another question, though. If God cannot alter his nature, then he is not in charge of or responsible for his own nature, which implies that some greater being gave him his nature. Any way you look at it, the concept of an omnipotent god is logically incoherent, and raises many problems with the concept of the god of classical theism.

Try evaluating omnipotence in terms of physics.

Omnipresence is unlimited power, given that power is defined as work done over time and work requires expending energy. To be omnipotent therefore requires infinite energy (and infinite time)

E=MC2 shows that energy cannot be infinite if matter exists.

You exist as matter therefore omnipotence cannot exist.

 

[ChristineM]

How many angels on the head of a pin??

As many as you can imagine

 

[1213]

I get a lot of different reactions from theists when I bring up the omnipotence paradox. The omnipotence paradox is the paradox that arises from the question (or some variation thereof) "Can an omnipotent god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?"...

That is actually really easy question. Omnipotent could create that rock that he could not lift. Later, if he wants to lift the rock, he can create more power to him and then lift the rock.

Basically, the question is, can omnipotent being resign his power. Of course, he can and after that he is not anymore all-powerful and I don’t think there is any reason to claim that after resigning power, person would have all power.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

How many angels on the head of a pin??

How big is the pin?