God and the Omnipotence paradox

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:48 am

Can the almighty creator, create something more powerful then the creator itself?

One of the greatest questions of all time...

Can God create a stone so heavy that even he cannot lift it?

I am curious as to how the religious followers explain how God can or cannot do certain things and how they relate to this paradox.

So...is this true?

God > Omnipotence

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 6:54 am

UOD sometimes I wonder just what circulates in that mind of yours.

The Borg collective would be easier to explain.

Debbie · Post by **Debbie** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 9:06 am

Evan, are you ok? You are starting to worry me.

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 9:07 am

The world omnipotence is never mentioned in the bible. This is something man has attached to God. There are things God cannot do, for example he cannot comit sin, he cannot lie.

He can do whatever he determines to do though.

But as men, we cannot truly understand God, we are very ignorant to his ways, and we cannot see the big picture from our perspective, we are not him and cannot think like him.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 9:15 am

Take a look around. Maybe we can see a fraction of the splendor that "some how" came to be. It's hard to wrap our minuscule minds around it all whether we believe it from chance or a creator. If God indeed spoke everything into creation then I'd say his power is above anything period. I'd also say that I can't wait to pick his brain!

mountainman · Post by **mountainman** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 9:46 am

After we solve this, we can debate the chicken and the egg and the tree in the woods.

WhoNut · Post by **WhoNut** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:32 am

Um...

If you are a believer, the simple answer is that he is incomprehensible. If not, who cares?

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:13 am

UOD wrote:Can the almighty creator, create something more powerful then the creator itself?

One of the greatest questions of all time...

Can God create a stone so heavy that even he cannot lift it?

I am curious as to how the religious followers explain how God can or cannot do certain things and how they relate to this paradox.

So...is this true?

God > Omnipotence

My answer applies to both man and to whatever one considers God to be.

First, let's define CREATE.

Create means: To cause to exist; bring into being.
It does NOT mean MAGIC OF SUDDENLY THERE'S SOMETHING WHERE THERE WAS NOTHING.

Both man and God have the ability to create.
For example, some consider that God created the world we live in. This may or may not be true, but that has no bearing here. And a man can create a house by pouring a foundation, framing, wiring, etc. There was no house, the man did some work, there is now a house. And for God to have created the world we live in he/she/it would have had to DO something, would have had to perform some action to produce a world.

Now, to create something more powerful than the one who created it, all that is necessary is for the creator to forget that he/she/it has created it. Or to intentionally or unintentionally not-know that he/she/it has any responsibility for the creation. Or quite simply, to cease creating it.

This is easily demonstrated.

A man and a woman create a marriage.
They establish rules for the marriage, make agreements.
They continue to create the marriage by communicating.
They violate agreements.
They communicate less.
The marriage is created less.
Unless remedied, the marriage cannot be controlled.
The marriage, failed, is more powerful than its members.

Bottom line is that for anything to continue to exist (survice) in this universe, it must continually be created, else will begin a course toward unexistence. Nothing in this universe is static. Even the desk you are sitting at is not static. It has molecules that are constantly changing position in space. And those molecules begin their path to destruction the instant you cease to care for that desk.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:26 am

Brent wrote:The world omnipotence is never mentioned in the bible. This is something man has attached to God. There are things God cannot do, for example he cannot comit sin, he cannot lie.

He can do whatever he determines to do though.

But as men, we cannot truly understand God, we are very ignorant to his ways, and we cannot see the big picture from our perspective, we are not him and cannot think like him.

So God isn't omnipotent?

If God cannot lie, then that is a limitation on God's power correct? Is that self imposed? Or.....does God have a creator?

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:28 am

TonyT wrote:My answer applies to both man and to whatever one considers God to be.

First, let's define CREATE.

Create means: To cause to exist; bring into being.
It does NOT mean MAGIC OF SUDDENLY THERE'S SOMETHING WHERE THERE WAS NOTHING.

Both man and God have the ability to create.
For example, some consider that God created the world we live in. This may or may not be true, but that has no bearing here. And a man can create a house by pouring a foundation, framing, wiring, etc. There was no house, the man did some work, there is now a house. And for God to have created the world we live in he/she/it would have had to DO something, would have had to perform some action to produce a world.

Now, to create something more powerful than the one who created it, all that is necessary is for the creator to forget that he/she/it has created it. Or to intentionally or unintentionally not-know that he/she/it has any responsibility for the creation. Or quite simply, to cease creating it.

This is easily demonstrated.

A man and a woman create a marriage.
They establish rules for the marriage, make agreements.
They continue to create the marriage by communicating.
They violate agreements.
They communicate less.
The marriage is created less.
Unless remedied, the marriage cannot be controlled.
The marriage, failed, is more powerful than its members.

Bottom line is that for anything to continue to exist (survice) in this universe, it must continually be created, else will begin a course toward unexistence. Nothing in this universe is static. Even the desk you are sitting at is not static. It has molecules that are constantly changing position in space. And those molecules begin their path to destruction the instant you cease to care for that desk.

Constant change is evolution. This goes back to a convo we had years ago....does God evolve?

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:36 am

UOD wrote:So God isn't omnipotent?

If God cannot lie, then that is a limitation on God's power correct? Is that self imposed? Or.....does God have a creator?

Nah, just that he is perfect. Nothing less than perfect can be in him or in his presence or he would not be "God". As far as God having a creator? Not the God I know exists. Why would you expect to know the person of God? I am not being facetious, but rather sincere. We are created in God's image and the "potential" is probably unthinkable, but we choose to set up walls and the beauty is that we have that choice.

The argument has been made for eons on why God can't just make us without sin or perfect. That would be cruel if you ask me. Without evil, you can't experience good, hate - no love etc...He wants communion with us because we want to. I seriously don't believe pure evolution gives us those choices. Wouldn't pure evolution strictly focus on survival? You'd "think" we would have at least shaken off the common cold by now? Oh crap, thread shift.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:37 am

UOD wrote:....does God evolve?

Ask him.

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:39 am

This thread explains a lot.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:41 am

Brent wrote:The world omnipotence is never mentioned in the bible.

Not specifically, but it is implied.

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:42 am

UOD wrote:So God isn't omnipotent?

If God cannot lie, then that is a limitation on God's power correct? Is that self imposed? Or.....does God have a creator?

But as men, we cannot truly understand God, we are very ignorant to his ways, and we cannot see the big picture from our perspective, we are not him and cannot think like him.

I put that sentence in there because really the question is WHY would God create a rock he could not move?

God does not create paradoxes, he creates logical things that make sense to us so we can understand them.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:53 am

Leatherneck wrote:Nah, just that he is perfect. Nothing less than perfect can be in him or in his presence or he would not be "God". As far as God having a creator? Not the God I know exists. Why would you expect to know the person of God? I am not being facetious, but rather sincere. We are created in God's image and the "potential" is probably unthinkable, but we choose to set up walls and the beauty is that we have that choice. The argument has been made for eons on why God can't just make us without sin or perfect. That would be cruel if you ask me. Without evil, you can't experience good, hate - no love etc...He wants communion with us because we want to. I seriously don't believe pure evolution gives us those choices. Wouldn't pure evolution strictly focus on survival? You'd "think" we would have at least shaken off the common cold by now? Oh crap, thread shift.

But what is perfection? Is perfection without error, without fault? If God is omnipotent, then God can do anything. If God cannot experience his own creations of sin, then is that not a limitation on his own power?

Who said that God cannot lie or sin?

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:56 am

Brent wrote:I put that sentence in there because really the question is WHY would God create a rock he could not move?

God does not create paradoxes, he creates logical things that make sense to us so we can understand them.

But we don't understand God....

Is WhoNut incorrect? He just said this:

If you are a believer, the simple answer is that he is incomprehensible

So if he is incomprehensible, then how is he logical?

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:02 pm

I said he creates logical things so that we can understand

He wouldn't create a paradox, cause that we could not understand

There are certain things about him we do know that the Bible tells us, it definitely gives us a picture of the power and glory of God, and there are things he wants for us, the Bible provides these answers

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:32 pm

Brent wrote:I said he creates logical things so that we can understand

He wouldn't create a paradox, cause that we could not understand

There are certain things about him we do know that the Bible tells us, it definitely gives us a picture of the power and glory of God, and there are things he wants for us, the Bible provides these answers

Well, wait a sec....why wouldn't he create a paradox? Paradoxes exist because of God...he created them correct?

Shinobi · Post by **Shinobi** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:32 pm

UOD wrote:Can the almighty creator, create something more powerful then the creator itself?

One of the greatest questions of all time...

Can God create a stone so heavy that even he cannot lift it?

I am curious as to how the religious followers explain how God can or cannot do certain things and how they relate to this paradox.

So...is this true?

God > Omnipotence

No, because God is almighty, because of this , anything that God could create, God could move.
God is the Almighty, no one is above God, so creating someone more "powerful" then himself, I do not see that.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:36 pm

Shinobi wrote:No, because God is almighty, because of this , anything that God could create, God could move.
God is the Almighty, no one is above him, so creating someone more "powerful" then him, I do not see that.

then that means that he can NOT create an immovable object which negates his almighty ability.

But see, the way to remove the paradox is for God to re-create himself in order to move the object....but that implies evolution imo.

stevebakh · Post by **stevebakh** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:38 pm

God and logic simply don't belong in the same sentence.

There's a small mention of this topic on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotenc ... mnipotence

My take? Well, I think the following article covers most, if not all of what I believe on this topic.

Belief in an omnipotent deity allows people to use sloppy logic and not have to think very hard. If they are faced with a difficult question about why an event occurred, all they have to say is, “God did it.” Then the reason behind the event is a mystery. This is the old “god of the gaps” answer, and it's an intellectual cop-out. It answers nothing; it predicts nothing; and it teaches nothing.

It's a long but good read. UOD, have you seen this piece before?

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/WhyAtheism.htm

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:41 pm

stevebakh wrote:God and logic simply don't belong in the same sentence.

There's a small mention of this topic on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotenc ... mnipotence

My take? Well, I think the following article covers most, if not all of what I believe on this topic.

It's a long but good read. UOD, have you seen this piece before?

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/WhyAtheism.htm

I have not seen it but will read it. I've been watching episodes of the Infidel Guy on Youtube.

And of course in conjunction with your wiki entry is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox

And yes, your wiki link did reinforce the limitation of divine omnipotence.

A_old · Post by **A_old** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:47 pm

wait wut? I like the elephant in the way.

stevebakh · Post by **stevebakh** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:47 pm

UOD wrote:I have not seen it but will read it. I've been watching episodes of the Infidel Guy on Youtube.

And of course in conjunction with your wiki entry is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox

And yes, your wiki link did reinforce the limitation of divine omnipotence.

I'll look-up infidel guy...

A good quote from the piece I linked to:

Yahweh can’t be both omnibenevolent and omnipotent, because terrible events really do occur, and this all-loving god hasn’t prevented them. This is known as the Problem of Evil (also known as theodicy), and I think that it is one of the biggest problems for those attempting to prove the existence of a loving, all-powerful god. How can anybody explain the existence of such a god, while also knowing the bad things that happen to all of us and the terrible things that happen to far too many?

The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus summed it up well when he wrote these ideas:

Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can and does not want to.
If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent.
If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked.
If, as they say, God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?

There's more that covers the whole contradictory nature of having all of the associated qualities that God has, like Omnibenevolent, Omnipotence, etc etc

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:50 pm

stevebakh wrote:I'll look-up infidel guy...

A good quote from the piece I linked to:

There's more that covers the whole contradictory nature of having all of the associated qualities that God has, like Omnibenevolent, Omnipotence, etc etc

Here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SjaMcCg ... re=channel

2hrs but good stuff. He debates Kent Hovind.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:08 pm

stevebakh wrote:God and logic simply don't belong in the same sentence.

Belief in an omnipotent deity allows people to use sloppy logic and not have to think very hard. If they are faced with a difficult question about why an event occurred, all they have to say is, “God did it.” Then the reason behind the event is a mystery. This is the old “god of the gaps” answer, and it's an intellectual cop-out. It answers nothing; it predicts nothing; and it teaches nothing.

We are all different for sure. I see the above statement as a cop-out. I also believe that in man's arrogance he simply hates not knowing the answer to "mysteries" and some of the extremely intellectual human beings simply refuse to lay down their arrogance. On the other hand some of the greatest scientific minds have come to the conclusion that the "chance" of existence is just not likely either. One thing is for sure that if you do believe in a creator than you also believe in accountability and that in itself is a problem for many. I am not just talking about "doing good things" either. Life is fleeting, why waste it trying to convince yourself or others that God is not real? I have little to gain by doing that, but everything to gain by believing.

stevebakh · Post by **stevebakh** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:15 pm

Leatherneck wrote:Life is fleeting, why waste it trying to convince yourself or others that God is not real? I have little to gain by doing that, but everything to gain by believing.

Good for you.

UOD, this Kent Hovind chap is awful. I'm not sure I can sit through 2 hours of this.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:18 pm

Leatherneck wrote:We are all different for sure. I see the above statement as a cop-out. I also believe that in man's arrogance he simply hates not knowing the answer to "mysteries" and some of the extremely intellectual human beings simply refuse to lay down their arrogance. On the other hand some of the greatest scientific minds have come to the conclusion that the "chance" of existence is just not likely either. One thing is for sure that if you do believe in a creator than you also believe in accountability and that in itself is a problem for many. I am not just talking about "doing good things" either. Life is fleeting, why waste it trying to convince yourself or others that God is not real? I have little to gain by doing that, but everything to gain by believing.

the arrogance of man is a creation of God.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:19 pm

stevebakh wrote:Good for you.

UOD, this Kent Hovind chap is awful. I'm not sure I can sit through 2 hours of this.

But it's good to hear him challenged. The retro virus theory is interesting.

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:20 pm

Leatherneck wrote:Life is fleeting, why waste it trying to convince yourself or others that God is not real? I have little to gain by doing that, but everything to gain by believing.

Pascal's Wager

stevebakh · Post by **stevebakh** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:30 pm

UOD wrote:But it's good to hear him challenged. The retro virus theory is interesting.

It would be interesting to have someone like Richard Dawkins vs Kent Hovind.

[edit]
His response to the retro virus question was enough to end this for me. He's the kind of person who leaves you feeling that you're talking to a brick wall. I'll check out some of the other infidelguy recordings though.

RoundEye · Post by **RoundEye** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:01 pm

UOD your question is similar in context to the Irresistible force paradox.

What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?

Common responses to this paradox resort to logic and semantics.

• Logic: if such a thing as an irresistible force exists, then no object is immovable, and vice versa. It is logically impossible to have these two entities (a force that cannot be resisted and an object that cannot be moved by any force) in the same universe.

• Semantics: if there is such a thing as an irresistible force, then the phrase immovable object is meaningless in that context, and vice versa, and the issue amounts to the same thing as, for example, asking for a triangle that has four sides.

This paradox is a form of the omnipotence paradox, but that paradox is most often discussed in the context of God's omnipotence (Can God create a stone so heavy it cannot be lifted, not even by God Himself?").

If you want to keep idiots busy for a while, read the List of Paradoxes. Hit somebody up with some paradoxes on that list and watch their eyes spin.

Excuse me for a bit, I need to go and lie down. I think I've given my eyeballs whiplash.

RoundEye · Post by **RoundEye** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:27 pm

Damnit UOD, you have me reading paradoxes again.

This one I find absolutely hilarious.

Buttered Cat Paradox

The buttered cat paradox is a joke paradox based on the tongue-in-cheek combination of two adages:
• Cats always land on their feet.
• Buttered toast always lands buttered side down.
The paradox arises when one considers what would happen if one attached a piece of buttered toast (butter side up) to the back of a cat, then dropped the cat from a large height.

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:33 pm

The buttered cat paradox is a joke paradox based on the tongue-in-cheek combination of two adages:
• Cats always land on their feet.
• Buttered toast always lands buttered side down.
The paradox arises when one considers what would happen if one attached a piece of buttered toast (butter side up) to the back of a cat, then dropped the cat from a large height.

Ahh...the pictures make it Inductive Logic.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:36 pm

mnosteele52 wrote:This thread explains a lot.

Alright folks, seems that mnosteele52 here finds something to be troubling but he can't communicate it effectively enough other than to utter the above quoted phrase.

So what does it explain...how to bake cookies?

If you came into this thread voluntarily....then what in the hell is your problem that you can't explain?

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:43 pm

Some of what's been uttered here goes back to what I said about a God abandoning responsibility. There may or may not be anything wrong with that either.

There's nothing iirrational about a God that creates and then leaves the rest up to us IF one believes that a God created us. After all, it's His game then, isn't it?

The downside of that is that people tend to "do as God has done" and assign cause & responsibility to God when faced with something they don't understand or cannot know

Do you realize that to "not-know" is an ability? That ability will keep one out of paradox traps.

OSULLY · Post by **OSULLY** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:59 pm

I love it when people combine semantics and logic. Since you can't prove that something doesn't exist does that mean you can prove something does exist? Awnser seems obviouse.

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 5:03 pm

OSULLY wrote:I love it when people combine semantics and logic. Since you can't prove that something doesn't exist does that mean you can prove something does exist? Awnser seems obviouse.

Pls elaborate.

Unholy · Post by **Unholy** » Sat Nov 15, 2008 5:04 pm

I found this image a while back.