# Omnipotence Paradox



## Scott (Jan 9, 2006)

How do you resolve the Omnipotence Paradox?


----------



## Arch2k (Jan 9, 2006)

There are many things that God cannot do, but they can all be summed up in the statement "God cannot do anything contrary to His nature." 

Scripturally, He cannot lie, and cannot change. Does this deny his omnipotence? Absolutely not.

To ask the question "Could an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that even that being could not lift it?" is to ask God to preform a contradiction, and this he cannot do. God is a logical being, and we as part of the image of God in man, we can be logical.


----------



## Saiph (Jan 9, 2006)

The paradox is present with all attributes, and therefore only becomes a problem when we seperate one attribute of God from the rest.

For instance: God is good, so how can there be evil in the world.

You set your mind in a trap by excluding any single attribute of God.
God is one and simple.

So with omnipotence:

God can create (anything which He cannot control to any degree).

or

God cannot create (anything which He cannot control to any degree).

However, God is not only perfect in power but also knowledge, wisdom, presence . . .

So, all His attributes are connected, and form restraints from within Himself.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 9, 2006)

Turretin's 'compound and divided' senses handle it easily.


----------



## Saiph (Jan 9, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> Turretin's 'compound and divided' senses handle it easily.



I agree that it does in a sense, but I still am not convinced that it isn't an arbitrary distinction. I prefer the word decretive and prescriptive, but that has the same problem.


----------



## CalsFarmer (Jan 9, 2006)

The wikipedia entry you have referenced to reminds me of the: 

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear, does it still make a sound? 

Secular descriptions or notions regarding the person and attributes of God...are useless.....somehow they never get and certainly do not want to get it. 

Kind of like the mans vanity avatar used by Saiph...mans knowledge and use of logic is imperfect. might I also add ridiculous at times....

[Edited on 1-9-2006 by CalsFarmer]


----------



## Scott (Jan 9, 2006)

I remember Bahnsen once addressed the problem by defining omnipotence of the Christian God to be the power necessary to do all His holy will. I think this may have been in the Stein debate.

How does Turretin's divded and compound explanation go?


----------



## JohnV (Jan 9, 2006)

For me this dilemma is simple: to define the paradox would entail a definition of the term "omnipotent". Not our definition, for we did not attribute it to God originally, but God's definition, for it is His attribute originally. If we see a paradox then the first consideration is not that there is a paradox, but that whether we understand the term "omnipotence". Clearly, if God is God, to whom nothing at all is not subject, and we see a paradox, then it is our failing, not God's: our failing to understand omnipotence. For it cannot be that God does not exist. Such a thing is unthinkable ( as per Anselm. ) That He is not omnipotent is impossible. Thus our understanding of His omnipotence falls short, rather than God's omnipotence falling short.


----------



## BobVigneault (Jan 9, 2006)

I like to take the question and turn in into an evangelistic tool. I answer, "I don't know but I know that God once made himself so vulnerable that he could not lift a cross-piece and in fact he stumbled and fell beneath it." This response opens up a great opportunity to share the message of the cross.

Related question - Can anything separate the sheep from God's love? NO! The implication is that not even God can.

The answer to how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I don't but I know what makes them dance. Luke 15:10 "Just so, I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents."


----------



## Scott (Jan 9, 2006)

Bob: What is the deal with the hair?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jan 9, 2006)

Does restrained potential reduce capability?


----------



## Saiph (Jan 9, 2006)

> _Originally posted by jdlongmire_
> Does restrained potential reduce capability?



A caged Lion is still capable of eating you isn't it ?


----------



## biblelighthouse (Jan 9, 2006)

Could an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that even that being could not lift it? 


It think the solution to this question is pretty simple . . . the solution lies in the fact that the question itself is logically flawed.

Part of the problem is that the question is actually trying to answer more than one question at once:
1) Is there any limit to the size of stone God could create?
2) Is there any limit to the size of stone God could lift?

The answer to BOTH questions is "No!" 

God can create any size stone. Imagine a stone as big as you like, and God can create one bigger.

God can lift any size stone. Imagine a stone as big as you like, and God can lift it.

So, when we parse out those two parts to the question, the answers are quite simple to come by. Thus, the answer to the question is simply, "No." God cannot create a stone to big for Him to lift, because He can lift any size stone.

But this does not mean there is a limit in the size stone God can create. It is not as if the answer of "no" to this question means that God can only create a stone yay big, and no bigger. Rather, His omnipotence is equally ultimate in both areas. He is all-powerful in stone creating ability, and He is all-powerful in stone lifting ability. This fact actually *supports* the fact of His omnipotence, rather than detracting from it.



But, then, why is the original question itself such a doozy? It is so problematic because it not only asks two questions at once, but it also simultaneously includes its own incoherence and inconsistency. This fact becomes clearer if we rephrase the question in more general terms. After all, we are not worried about the specifics of giant stones, but about the power of God itself, as demonstrated in the creation and lifting of them. So let's rephrase the Omnipotence Paradox thus:


Can an *all-powerful* being demonstrate such *great power* that he renders himself *powerless*?


As you can see, I have substituted "all-powerful" as a synonym for "omnipotent", "great power" for the creation of a big stone, and "powerless" for the inability to lift the big stone.

Once we rephrase the paradox as you see above, I hope you can see why the question itself is hopelessly flawed, and internally incoherent. It is like saying, "Can a number get so close to infinity that it becomes zero?" It is like saying, "Is it possible to get so smart that you become even smarter than yourself?" It is simply nonsense. 

Thus, trying to answer the question is so baffling, because the question _itself_ is incoherent and flawed, not because there is anything illogical about God's existence.




[Edited on 1-10-2006 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## Saiph (Jan 9, 2006)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> Could an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that even that being could not lift it?
> 
> 
> ...



When you put it that way it is rather absurd.
Like asking if an immortal person could commit suicide.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Jan 9, 2006)

I would also like to point out the application of this question to the defense of Calvinism, and the nonsense of Arminianism:

Again, let's rephrase the Omnipotence Paradox like this:

"Can an all-powerful being demonstrate such great power that he renders himself powerless?"


Have you ever noticed that this is *precisely* the Arminian's argument for the creation of libertarian free-will?

In fact, just a few weeks ago, my Arminian dad said, "The Arminian God is actually _more sovereign_ than the Calvinist God!" He went on to explain: "The Arminian God is able to create free-will if He wants to . . . but the Calvinist God can't do it!"

You see, the very same argument can be reduced to the same basic question posed in the Omnipotence Paradox. This is true because libertarian free-will, by definition, has beings having thoughts over which God does *not* have control. Thus, He is *powerless* over those particular thoughts. 

(Of course the Arminian would not state it this way . . . he would just say, "It's not God's fault that guy thought of doing something sinful." --- but any way you slice it, God is still not the originator, and thus not in control of, that thought, since that thought did not arise by God's doing.)


The Arminian's argument originally runs like this:

God is *so powerful* that He can create a situation in which His creatures have *libertarian free-will*.


And we can fairly restate the Arminian's argument thus:

God is *so powerful* that He can create a situation in which He is *powerless* (over their thoughts/motives).


And, as I have pointed out earlier, that very statement is incoherent nonsense. The imagined _increase_ of God's power cannot possibly result in a _decrease_ of His power. You cannot get a negative balance by depositing more and more money into the bank. 

Omnipotence, by definition, is the pinnacle of power. Thus it is incoherent to speak of Omnipotence somehow outdoing itself. God cannot overcome Himself.





[Edited on 1-10-2006 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 10, 2006)

I wish I could remember the source of this quote, but here's the best answer to: "Can God make a stone so large he couldn't lift it?"

*"I don't know, but he can make a hell so hot you'll be sorry you ever asked!"*

[Edited on 1-10-2006 by toddpedlar]


----------



## tdowns (Jan 10, 2006)

*I like it!!!*

That's what I'm talking about. Nice work Joseph.


----------



## CalsFarmer (Jan 10, 2006)

> _Originally posted by toddpedlar_
> I wish I could remember the source of this quote, but here's the best answer to: "Can God make a stone so large he couldn't lift it?"
> 
> *"I don't know, but he can make a hell so hot you'll be sorry you ever asked!"*
> ...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 10, 2006)

Augustine, _Confessions_ (11.12.14):



> "See, I answer him that asketh, 'What did God do before He made heaven and earth?' I answer not as one is said to have done merrily (eluding the point of the question), 'he was preparing hell (saith he) for pryers into mysteries.'"


----------



## Theogenes (Jan 18, 2006)

I think the resolution is simple. It's a logical absurdity and therfore nonsense. It's like asking God to make a square circle.
Jim


----------



## satz (Jan 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> Could an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that even that being could not lift it?
> 
> 
> ...



nice! one of the best explainations i've seen for this...


----------

