Listverse has just released a list of paradoxes. They are excellent sources of philosophical discussion, but alas, when it involves religion, the paradox in question has to be resolved, or at least has its illusory contradiction laid bare.
There are two paradoxes which may confuse the Christian. The first being the paradox of omnipotence, which is the first item on Listverse's list. The other being the paradox of freedom, not on the list.
I shall try to touch on them at length.
Of omnipotence:
A classical problem:
Can God create a rock so heavy He can't lift it?
Answering yes or no would imply incapability of either creating or lifting the stone, and assuming omnipotence is the "capability to do all things", this is a paradox.
As Utahraptor said here, this can be generalised like thus:
If you can do anything, then you can do things that prevent you from doing other things, and therefore, you can't do anything.
In simpler terms: if you have the powers to do everything, you would have the power to strip yourself of all powers included, then you don't have any power. Clearly, this has to mean that there is a fundamental error in our notion of omnipotence, because if we follow the logic of the paradox, omnipotence itself may lead to impotence.
Omnipotence, then, has to be redefined so as the definition is such that it excludes contradictions to itself, unlike our definition above. In turn, we have to narrow down the list of the powers of the omnipotent. This may sound absurd if we relate back that the omnipotent Being is God. This has to mean that God has limitations of what He can do.
Fair enough, but it is even absurder if you don't limit on what God can do, for instance: God can sin. Well, no, of course not. Does that mean God is not all-powerful? Quite the opposite.
God cannot sin. If we generalise this, we can say: God cannot contradict himself. That would solve the rock problem. The answer is a simple 'no', simply because God cannot contradict himself.
Thus, the source of the paradox is on the inherently contradictory definition of omnipotence itself. The definition cannot be all-encompassing, because some powers would contradict others.
Paradox of freedom, in due course.
5 comments:
Yup, if anybody uses this paradox to attack Christianity, he/she must be mistaken on the definition of omnipotence. IMO, I think asking this particular paradox question is akin to asking God to create a square triangle. Why, of course it would not be possible for God to create a square triangle, for it contradicts the law of logic! Reason, as I believe, originated from God. A statement which contains flaws and inconsistency could not be used as a standard by which one could judge Logos Himself. Well, that's a piece of my mind.
Yes and yes, but I dislike that comparison, since that problem is easily solved, since a square triangle is only a mathematical entity.
If you ask God to make a square triangle, probably he would just create a universe where that's possible. Mathematical universes turn out to be quite pliable to one's whims. Even impotent beings like ourselves can do it. Just adjust the axioms.
However, it is difficult to conceive an alternate universe where "God can create rock so heavy He can't lift it." Probably we would have to change the law of logic itself as you mention.
This comes from simple misapprehension. There is no omnipotence paradox. If omnipotence is defined as the capacity to carry out any conceivable act regardless of logical limitations, then God can definitely lift a rock that He cannot lift, and create it too. How come? Because all things are possible to the Omnipotent!
But didn't He just not lift the rock? Yes, and He lifted it too! :)
The key is this: a logic is not necessarily consistent with reality; this is true in any form of logic.
@Trebuchet:
How true. The fact that omnipotence includes logic-defying is a good point. I admit though, I am not so much interested in the philosophy side rather than the philology side of this paradox, or lack thereof.
From a philological viewpoint, omnipotence is the capacity to do all things, which also includes not doing certain things or anything at all; if we relate it to the English 'potential', then omnipotence is the latent capacity without proof being necessary.
In other words, God can indeed make a rock He cannot lift because He has made HImself unable to lift it. That's the idea of kenosis. He can of course then make Himself able to lift it, thus demonstrating the capacity to have both states.
Post a Comment