Omnipotence paradox

Can God create a rock he cannot lift?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=QQaQvUhnc_M
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Maybe he can't lift the rock in this reality but in another she can.

Omnipotence is a logical impossibility.

Can Allah create an another Allah, with another name, which he cannot kill?

>ywn get a 5th part of the desert trilogy where hod makes another god and they fight it out.

It depends on how you define 'God'.

Jew here, Christians are complete idiots with their false Messiah and ridiculous theology. Obviously G*d is not omnipotent, that is a completely nonsense concept as your question adequately shows.

If you would like to define God and answer OP's question then go ahead.

Yes, and then he would lift it

jews are LARPers. going around with their "we wuz hebrews an shieeet".

Then he can't create a rock that he cannot lift.

Yes. Then, He can lift it.

Yes he can, and then he would lift it

Says the Christian LARPing as one of G*d's chosen.

What do you mean? YHWH is also omnipotent according to jews.

That doesn't make sense.

Not true.

Israel is one big amusement park.
>revive nearly dead language, because why not?
>actually call your money shekels
>most of the jews are ethnically european/turk/med

>What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?

What if... listen to me... what if rather than omnipotence meaning "do whatever the fuck I want", we define omnipotence as "do whatever is possible within the rules I imposed"?

Think on football. Omnipotence wouldn't mean "score a goal by running around the world, through Japan, Europe and back to America, so fast nobody would follow me", it would mean "scoring a goal by kicking the ball so hard it goes from one goal to another". The first is against the rules, because you're leaving the field, but the later is perfectly within the rules, as the whole point of the game is to score goals without touching the ball with your hands.

Therefore, breaking the rules for the sake of it isn't omnipotence, is plain dickery. So to answer the OP question, we have to define first the rules about this particular question. And given the things, I tend to believe God wouldn't do something that he couldn't retroactively undo, therefore, no, He can't create a rock that He can't lift, because that would be something beyond His own strength. However, that doesn't mean He isn't omnipotent, is just that the current set of rules doesn't allow that thing to happen, ever.

Back to the starting question I quote, the irresistible force paradox, the answer is simply and similar: in a universe where one can exists, the other can't, therefore is a moot point.

>omnipotence
>bound by logic
Isn't this like, contradictory?

Yes, because he is god.
People still don't get it that the rules of logic don't apply to god, because he is god.

I'm not clear what your point or problem is, goy. Try not speaking in random greentext.

>Obviously G*d is not omnipotent, that is a completely nonsense concept as your question adequately shows.
But my towns Rabbi told me he was.

And is Omnipresent.

And is Omniscient

And is Eternal

And has Nanite Manipulation powers

And can use Monotheistic Deity Physiology

And knows Waterbending

It is like Pinoys claiming the Vatican is their ancestral homeland. simply because they happen to be catholic. then italians starting decades of terrorism across italy and the western world to remove the Pinoys.

Hmm so you mean the idea of god isn't logical. In a universe that is completely dictated by logic.

thinking face

Well if you take a pantheistic view, and consider God and the Universe as the same thing, he would not be able to. God would be able to do anything possible within the universe, but to go above that would be to go above himself. Although in this sense, God might not have a personality,so he might not have the will to do it in the first place.

Weight and strength are only concepts in the physical universe, and not necessarily in the spiritual world. So a god may be able to create a rock, and if he had an identity he couldn't be able to move it, but because he is also the universe he would have the power to move it at the same time. This is basically some kind of bastardization that uses trinitarian concepts to merge a Pantheistic God and a Christian one. I personally don't believe my God is all-powerful.

God is bigger than what your mind can understand

God don't useful. Very hard get something useful from him

>In a universe that is completely dictated by logic.
>

So the answer to OP's question in your view is 'no'. That's all you had to say.

That's another way of saying "I can't answer OP's question".

I still have no idea what the hell you are on about, although in fairness Flip politics and history isn't my strong point. Would you mind properly explaining.

Did he now? How you got some citations about this being a mainstream Jewish concept rather than you randomly claiming a local Rabbi said something?

name one (1) thing in the universe that doesn't follow logical progression and follow strict logical rules.

Women.

No he cannot, in the Christian religion omnipotence does not extend to logical impossibilities. While the Deity can violate the laws of physics or chains of causality, he cannot create real contradictions. This is not a question of power, but of sense.

God can throw a galaxy like a discus, because while there is a thousand physics reasons that is impossible, there is not a single logical reason it can't be done. There is no contradiction in the idea of a galaxy, and the idea of its being thrown.

However the idea of making perfectly free slaves, square circles, or so on, that is to say true contradictions [and ignoring the possibility of using weird-logic so that they no longer contradict, such as making 'square circles' using non-Euclid bullshit or something], he can't do that.

People who try and make God "above" basic logic in reality accomplish nothing but making him below it. And as to those who will say that "The ability to perform any logically-coherent action or manifest any logically-coherent phenomena" doesn't count as 'Omnipotence', I will simply state that is how I am defining it for my conception of Deity, and note that the alternative conception "The ability to do absolutely anything no matter how absurd" is, well, absurd.

Obviously he does. God creates the rock he cannot lift and then just lifts it because he is omnipotent.

God here.

I can't but only bc I don't even want to try

Can God kill Satan?

>How you got some citations about this being a mainstream Jewish concept rather than you randomly claiming a local Rabbi said something?
The other towns Rabbi said something similar.

But I don't trust him since he's a Haredi and known to dabble in the Dark arts.

He sounds like a Palestinian, mate.

Aren't they all?

You make a good pint.

What's your position on slave girls? I'm personally all for it.

In this modern age it is considered taboo since the slut goods are usually used more times than they are worth to trade rather than the pure christian virgings you can get from the balkans.

That and Internet porn exists.

If God is infinite in His very nature, then to create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift, God would have to create something greater than Himself - who is infinite - which is impossible. But not only that, God would have to deal with physical realities that simply make the proposition in our universe impossible.
Firstly, God cannot create a physical rock of infinite mass, because no such matter can exist on our plane of existence. Matter is, by its very nature, finite.
Secondly, we have to look at what it means to "lift" something to begin with. To "lift" means to elevate something against the current predominant gravitational field. Newton's law of universal gravitation suggests that the gravitational pull between two objects is directly proportional to their masses. So not only would God have to create something of infinite mass, but He would have to create a plane of existence where there is an infinite force of gravity acting against Him to lift the mass, but the plane of existence would also have to act in such a way that its gravity was somehow greater than the infinite mass.
So, if God were to fundamentally alter the gravitational coefficient, the laws of gravity, or the definition of lift - and thus cause the physical universe as we know it to cease - then yes, He could create something of so great a mass that He could not lift it, thus causing the end of all things. But, as we see, this is simply impossible.

Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem exists, yet mathematics is still useful, and the universe exists.

The world is full of paradoxes, but they are non-breaking paradoxes, my friend.

> God would have to create something greater than Himself - who is infinite - which is impossible.
Nice meme. Recently mathematics discovered that there are infinities far greater than the common one. Nothing stops God from creating Super God, except, maybe the fact that Super God already exists (and this si from where God came to be at the first place).

No. Liebniz's Law.

>In a universe that is completely dictated by logic.

But he created that universe and all its logical laws from nothing. What makes you think he can't warp them in ways that would seem impossible for us to understand?

fuck off khazar

Name 1 thing thay actually does and show me the complete proof.

Where in the bible you can get those convenient set of rules?

Ah yes, the pop-sci retards have arrived.

An omnipotent beeing can do anything, even take away its own omnipotence.
So yes, God could create a rock he cannot lift, but then he would stop beeing omnipotent

using some form of realitvity he probably could. he could create a rock that is too heavy to life from the point of view of one observer, but the same rock is being lifted by another observer.

youtube.com/watch?v=QQaQvUhnc_M

>Jew here,

Stop LARPing and go back to Poland, Kazimierz.

Yes. This rock is Allah who is stronger than Jesus.

You have simply worded the question wrong.

You are asking if there is something an omnipotent being can not do and the answer to that is always no, because the being can do everything.

So a proper wording of the question would be "Can God create a rock with eternal mass and still lift it" and the answer to that is yes.

Youre wrong wording is "Cant God create a rock with eternal mass and still lift it" and the answer to that is no.

>hurr durr the bible is the only piece of canon and i read some cherry picked verses from the old testament once so i know what im talknig about

you fail to realize that time exists making anything possible

Well, that gos can't work outside logic is a pretty good answer, but I really cant2 rap my mind how it could possibly have a theological basia of the philosophical basis isn't even that clear cut.

Because he didn't create the universe. The Wise Lord, Ahura Mazda did.

He can't. If he can't then he can't and if he can then he can't because ex falso quodlibet.

He doesn't exist, so no.

Claims about omnipotence are logical claims.

yes but he can also lift it

doesn't make sense? that's because it is beyond your understanding.

Such a rock doesn't exist. Thus, he can't lift it, since it doesn't exist.

Once he creates it, it exists, so he can lift it.

He should be able to add and remove that property at will.

Religions reference it the other way around. They don't define what omnipotence is, and then measure if God can live up to it. Instead they define God himself as omnipotent, therefore everything god can do is the definition of omnipotency. Or in other words, God holds all the powers an entity can hold, and if there is something that cant be done by God, it cant be done by anyone or anything.

> if there is something that cant be done by God, it cant be done by anyone or anything
Does it mean that God can sin?

They're idiots? Obviously believing in talking snakes, that bacon is not delicious but evil, a distortion of ancient historical facts and a megalomaniacle viewpoint in which you declare yourself to be better than the rest is better, right? I'm pretty sure that the Nazi's tought the same about themselves. It's a good thing that they found zero evidence for Moses, but it's a shame that you guys still hold on to your disproven beliefs, because you're still stuck believing in a fictional past.

Shit I don't think this guy's trolling

Since sin in defintion are acts that Gods deem bad, of course God himself can just change that definition and whatever he does immediately becomes a non-sin. Like for example when he killed millions of people although he said himself killing people is a sin.

I used to think it was just edginess when people compared faith with mental disorder.

*tib* *tib* *inserts banana* *dies alone*

I like it. I'm not really a theist but this seems coherent.

Would then logic not supercede divinity, given that it binds Creator and created? God and creation thus being a consequence of nature?

This seems similar to the moral paradox - is it good because God wills it, or does God will it because it is good. Your conception of deity seems to suggest the latter, no?

Christ

God is logic or something like that is your best bet. if you don't want God to be the absurd entity that is above it.

Maybe we are what one day will be the supergod and all this is just the process of creation like an embryo growing in the womb of the mother.

Omnipotence means that god can do everything
Nowhere does it say that paradoxes created from human languages apply to him

Omnipotence is human language term if the language doesn't apply to God that means we don't know anything about him.

This. Super-God is a most logical theory of them all. If there is God, why there can't be God's God who is even beyond God's realm?

>Let's redefine omnipotence to something other than omnipotence so that we can still claim that god has that characteristic-the post

What's the problem with admitting that we don't know anything about him ?

Alrighty then

God in the traditional theistic sense cannot be logic, however nature can be (which is why I used them interchangablely). The type of God theists tend to talk about is personal and conscious. Logic may be a quality of "His," but given that logic itself is an abstraction, as may be nature, it cannot used interchangeably unless we equate God and nature in a Spinozan fashion, but again we would then no longer be talking about a creator person which this kind of discussion is focused on.

That's another way of saying there is no God. It's a pretty intellectually dishonest way of going about it imo unless you're not even talking about the same type of God in which case is just intellectually lacking

He can make it so heavy he cannot lift it but the minute he wants to lift it he can. The omnipotence of wanting to lift it overrides the omnipotence of making it so heavy he cannot lift it.

Think of it crassly like this:
You are omnipotent.
You cause all ice cream to be forever entirely strawberry flavored instantly the universe over.
You then decide to make all ice cream to be forever entirely vanilla flavored instantly the universe over.

If you cannot revert the omnipotence of making all ice cream strawberry flavored then you are not omnipotent. If you can revert your omnipotence it does not mean you were not omnipotent, it just means all-encompassing power you wish to apply at that moment is replacing the all encompassing power you wished to apply earlier.

Now yeah if God thinks "I want to make a rock I cannot lift and lift it" he's got a shitty paradox, except by the chronology of that thought his last thought is "I want to lift it". So that is the omnipotent expression.

If it's some "I want to make this rock I both cannot and can lift at the exact same time" then God is a right cheeky cunt for making such a paradox.

I'd rescind what I said and just agree with what you said. If he wanted to create a universe or a capacity to pull some of that non-euclid bullshit then he could. But by the laws of his creation he cannot. The omnipotence is that he could go and create some non-euclid bullshit, but he didn't. Arguing if he could or couldn't is like arguing why didn't God create the color [insert some jibberish zalgo text]. It's immaterial.

I for one am glad god didn't create a universe that resembles the fucking warp of 40k.

Do you seriously think your shitty religion is any better kek

Yes. Then he lifts it with the other arm.

he would give us an answer we can never comprehend

You seem to comprehend that pretty well there

> That's another way of saying there is no God.
It isn't. God is one thing. Super-God is another, much greater one. Both exist and important for their respective roles in the universe.

There is no problem, except most people wouldn't admit that they don't know anything about God.

the sum of all powers simultaneously is omnipotence, its just not a someone

The mere fact of the Deity being one thing means by necessity He is not other contradictory things.

If the Deity is Courageous that means by definition He is not a coward. If He is Honest then He, by utmost necessity, is not a liar. Ignorant laymen running in and trying to bolster His reputation by saying "He is above courage and cowardice!" are saying nothing of value, they're just trying to imply a transcendent quality where none even theoretically exists.

The basic principles of logic mean that if a thing is a thing, it is that thing. It is identical to itself. God is God, that means whatever He is, He isn't not-God. God being all powerful doesn't mean He can perform contradictions because performing a contradiction isn't a question of power but of logic. Trying to make Him above such a thing merely puts Him below it, and makes Him the laughing stock of the unbeliever.

And that is without getting into the theodicy side of this argument, namely that most of the arguments against the problem of Evil [such as free will] vanish like smoke if you assume God can do the blatantly impossible such as create perfectly obedient beings with liberty.

do the jews believe in the cosmic and earthly face of God? Is the trinity like an upgrade of that?

Omnipotence in and of itself requires a being not confined in the medium of time and space, on the contrary omnipotence necessitates a transcendent position.
From a position transcendent of space, materiality can be manipulated, and...
From a position transcendent of time, the law of identity in logic no longer applies (because it consists in a closed system) and therefore the rock can be in many conditions at once, hence simultaneously possible and impossible to lift.

It's a lot like Schrodinger's cat.