The God paradox

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
Rationalbenny
New Trial Member
Posts: 3
Joined: January 7th, 2018, 1:47 pm

The God paradox

Post by Rationalbenny » January 9th, 2018, 7:44 am

This is perhaps for me the most counter-intuitive subversive concept i can ever try to even fathom because of its complex nature that raises religious concerns.

the problem that i have with this theory is the fact that it can spiral out of control i ask anyone here to try to disprove or perhaps explain this theory.
so lets get address of the rudimentary concept of this theory.
The god paradox states that in a precedent if God is unable to create a stone that he cannot lift then he is not omnipotent the paradox is created by the tautological dichotomous statement that if he can lift a stone that he created for the purpose of not being able to lift it then this also is an identification that he is not all omnipotent.
however this grotesque paradox can trigger an infinite chain of question such as is God limited by his own power if so he is not omnipotent or if God is above everything can he be above existence if not he is not omnipotent after all the concept of a God is an existential being ; including the famous bible verse that "unto him all things are possible" but indeed if he can do the impossible this implies that he can contradict himself and create other Gods and over rule his own judgement and this is possible then he is not omnipotent

I find difficulty defining an existential being that is all powerful because if he can do everything possible this means he can do the impossible because even the impossible exists as a possibility

Alias
Posts: 2353
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: The God paradox

Post by Alias » January 9th, 2018, 8:41 pm

Before you drive yourself crazy, ask these questions:
What does it mean to be omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient?
Would it be possible?
If any or all of these propositions are impossible, given physics, etc.,
why bother arguing about them?
If, on the other hand, physics, etc. are of no consequence,
why bother asking a god to explain itself?

IOW -
Why are you wasting your time on this when you could be having having a beer and watching a hockey game?

Eduk
Posts: 1917
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: The God paradox

Post by Eduk » January 10th, 2018, 9:12 am

I would also say that language is trivially prone to creating paradox where none exists.
For example. 'this sentence is false'.
What you have done is say if God is a round square how come he exists.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: The God paradox

Post by Londoner » January 10th, 2018, 12:16 pm

Rationalbenny wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:44 am

The god paradox states that in a precedent if God is unable to create a stone that he cannot lift then he is not omnipotent...
Only if you understand 'omnipotent' to describe having a quantity of power. Rather, the idea is that God is outside material concepts like 'weight' and 'strength'.
I find difficulty defining an existential being that is all powerful because if he can do everything possible this means he can do the impossible because even the impossible exists as a possibility
The conventional idea of God is not that he can 'do the impossible'.

Besides, in the phrase 'exists as a possibility', what would 'exist' mean?

User avatar
Stevehicks25
New Trial Member
Posts: 1
Joined: January 6th, 2018, 8:41 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by Stevehicks25 » January 10th, 2018, 3:31 pm

This to me raises what I think is the point of Godel’s proof. If you think that somehow a God can be considered to be part of a logical system. I believe his proof states basically that there is no logical system which is complete or does not have logically inconsistent statements, such as “if god is omnipotent then he should be able to create a stone that he can’t lift, which is self contradictory, but a possible statement within the logical system that posits God’s existence and that He is omnipotent. So I think the point is that a logical system that assumes God is possible, is bound to be subject to have logically inconsistent statements and that the above argument does not prove or disprove the existence of God, which can’t be proved or disproved anyway.

Eduk
Posts: 1917
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: The God paradox

Post by Eduk » January 10th, 2018, 4:16 pm

I can't prove or disprove I can turn invisible.

Namelesss
Posts: 499
Joined: November 15th, 2017, 1:59 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by Namelesss » January 12th, 2018, 6:01 pm

Rationalbenny wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:44 am
This is perhaps for me the most counter-intuitive subversive concept i can ever try to even fathom because of its complex nature that raises religious concerns.

the problem that i have with this theory is the fact that it can spiral out of control i ask anyone here to try to disprove or perhaps explain this theory.
so lets get address of the rudimentary concept of this theory.
The god paradox states that in a precedent if God is unable to create a stone that he cannot lift then he is not omnipotent the paradox is created by the tautological dichotomous statement that if he can lift a stone that he created for the purpose of not being able to lift it then this also is an identification that he is not all omnipotent.
however this grotesque paradox can trigger an infinite chain of question such as is God limited by his own power if so he is not omnipotent or if God is above everything can he be above existence if not he is not omnipotent after all the concept of a God is an existential being ; including the famous bible verse that "unto him all things are possible" but indeed if he can do the impossible this implies that he can contradict himself and create other Gods and over rule his own judgement and this is possible then he is not omnipotent

I find difficulty defining an existential being that is all powerful because if he can do everything possible this means he can do the impossible because even the impossible exists as a possibility
Again, ignorance is filled with paradoxes that reflect that ignorance.
Had you spent 5 minutes doing some internet research on your 'paradox' of God and Her rock, your confusion might have been alleviated before you offered 'this'.
Here, for your reading pleasure, learn why it is not a paradox, just an ignorant question;

Can God Make a Rock So Big He Cannot Lift It?

http://apologeticjunkie.blogspot.com/20 ... ft_24.html


This is one of my favorite questions that comes up from time to time. Indeed, many atheists and skeptics have posed this question in an attempt to stump Christians and somehow disprove the omnipotence (and existence) of God. Maybe you've been there. What is so ironic about a question of this type is that rather than prove any sort of deficiency in the character or nature of God, this question actually shows a lack of clear thinking and logic on the part of the skeptic! In other words, the question itself is flawed and fallacious in several ways and, unfortunately, the person raising the question has not taken the time to truly think this problem through.

Problem #1: this question commits the fallacy known as a loaded question. Imagine if I were to ask you, "Have you stopped beating your spouse yet?" If you answer yes, that means you were beating your spouse but you have since stopped. And if you answer no, that means you're still beating them! Either way you answer the question, you automatically concede that you beat your spouse! This is a no win situation because the question itself starts with a false assumption and is therefore a "loaded" question. Likewise, the question "Can God make a rock so big He cannot life it?" also starts with a false assumption, i.e., that God is not omnipotent. If you answer "Yes" to the question, that means that God is not omnipotent since He can make the rock but isn't powerful enough to lift it. But if you answer "No," that also means that God is not omnipotent since He couldn't make a rock so big He cannot lift it! In other words, the question itself is dishonest, a pseudo-question, since it begs the question by assuming God is not omnipotent.

Problem #2: this question commits a categorical fallacy. The question itself is incoherent and meaningless. Suppose I were to ask you, "What does the color blue smell like?" or "How much does the number seven weigh?" These are category mistakes because colors don't smell and numbers don't weigh anything. They are logical impossibilities. In the same manner, asking the question "Can God make a rock so big He cannot lift it?" is essentially to ask "Can God's power defeat His own power?" This is nonsensical and a category error since the question is being incorrectly applied. Greg Koukl has stated, "The question is nonsense because it treats God as if He were two instead of one. The phrase 'stronger than' can only be used when two subjects are in view...Since God is only one...it makes no sense to ask if He is stronger than Himself."

Problem #3: this question commits a straw man fallacy. The goal of the skeptic who asks this question is to somehow undermine the Christian concept of an omnipotent God. It is thought that if it can be shown there are some things God cannot do, this would prove that God could not be omnipotent and thus could not exist as Christians have traditionally portrayed Him. However, this line of reasoning is attacking a distorted concept of Biblical omnipotence and is therefore guilty of the straw man fallacy.

So what does it mean then that God is omnipotent? Omnipotence doesn't mean that God can do anything. There are actually quite a few things that God cannot do. He cannot make squared circles. He cannot make a one-ended stick. He cannot sin. He cannot improve His morality. So God is limited in a sense. But not one of these "limitations" has to do with power, rather, they are logical contradictions. Also, notice that His "limitations" are not due to any defects in His character or power but rather they are the result of His perfection and rational nature! As Norman Geisler has stated, "He is only 'limited' by His unlimited perfection." To say that God is omnipotent then is to say that God can do anything so long as it is logically possible and consistent with His nature. God's omnipotence does not mean that He can do what is impossible but only that He can do whatever is actually possible.

Conclusion: So what then is the answer? Can God make a rock so big He cannot lift it? My comments above put aside, I still like the way one particular 7-year-old responded: "I can't give you a smart answer to a dumb question."

*************************************************

The old "willing or able" diatribe asked countless times here by those who never search it and somehow always think they are original! Chris Tiegreen answers you this way..."He is both willing and able! The problem is not with God's power and it's not with his love, it is with our faith. When God doesn't resolve a situation to our liking, especially in which the suffering is great, we are tempted to accuse Him of either impotence or negligence. Jesus' response tells us to look within...unanswered prayer is a call to come closer, look deeper, know God better, and seek His will further. It's a call to be transformed as a disciple and to be conformed to the image of Christ. By such the Father separates those who desire to test Him from those who desire to know Him."

Namelesss
Posts: 499
Joined: November 15th, 2017, 1:59 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by Namelesss » January 12th, 2018, 6:06 pm

Eduk wrote:
January 10th, 2018, 4:16 pm
I can't prove or disprove I can turn invisible.
One of my sons, once, could turn things invisible also, just by closing his eyes.
Like you? *__-

Neither science nor philosophy 'proves'.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3017
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by LuckyR » January 13th, 2018, 2:27 am

Namelesss wrote:
January 12th, 2018, 6:01 pm
Rationalbenny wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:44 am
This is perhaps for me the most counter-intuitive subversive concept i can ever try to even fathom because of its complex nature that raises religious concerns.

the problem that i have with this theory is the fact that it can spiral out of control i ask anyone here to try to disprove or perhaps explain this theory.
so lets get address of the rudimentary concept of this theory.
The god paradox states that in a precedent if God is unable to create a stone that he cannot lift then he is not omnipotent the paradox is created by the tautological dichotomous statement that if he can lift a stone that he created for the purpose of not being able to lift it then this also is an identification that he is not all omnipotent.
however this grotesque paradox can trigger an infinite chain of question such as is God limited by his own power if so he is not omnipotent or if God is above everything can he be above existence if not he is not omnipotent after all the concept of a God is an existential being ; including the famous bible verse that "unto him all things are possible" but indeed if he can do the impossible this implies that he can contradict himself and create other Gods and over rule his own judgement and this is possible then he is not omnipotent

I find difficulty defining an existential being that is all powerful because if he can do everything possible this means he can do the impossible because even the impossible exists as a possibility
Again, ignorance is filled with paradoxes that reflect that ignorance.
Had you spent 5 minutes doing some internet research on your 'paradox' of God and Her rock, your confusion might have been alleviated before you offered 'this'.
Here, for your reading pleasure, learn why it is not a paradox, just an ignorant question;

Can God Make a Rock So Big He Cannot Lift It?

http://apologeticjunkie.blogspot.com/20 ... ft_24.html


This is one of my favorite questions that comes up from time to time. Indeed, many atheists and skeptics have posed this question in an attempt to stump Christians and somehow disprove the omnipotence (and existence) of God. Maybe you've been there. What is so ironic about a question of this type is that rather than prove any sort of deficiency in the character or nature of God, this question actually shows a lack of clear thinking and logic on the part of the skeptic! In other words, the question itself is flawed and fallacious in several ways and, unfortunately, the person raising the question has not taken the time to truly think this problem through.

Problem #1: this question commits the fallacy known as a loaded question. Imagine if I were to ask you, "Have you stopped beating your spouse yet?" If you answer yes, that means you were beating your spouse but you have since stopped. And if you answer no, that means you're still beating them! Either way you answer the question, you automatically concede that you beat your spouse! This is a no win situation because the question itself starts with a false assumption and is therefore a "loaded" question. Likewise, the question "Can God make a rock so big He cannot life it?" also starts with a false assumption, i.e., that God is not omnipotent. If you answer "Yes" to the question, that means that God is not omnipotent since He can make the rock but isn't powerful enough to lift it. But if you answer "No," that also means that God is not omnipotent since He couldn't make a rock so big He cannot lift it! In other words, the question itself is dishonest, a pseudo-question, since it begs the question by assuming God is not omnipotent.

Problem #2: this question commits a categorical fallacy. The question itself is incoherent and meaningless. Suppose I were to ask you, "What does the color blue smell like?" or "How much does the number seven weigh?" These are category mistakes because colors don't smell and numbers don't weigh anything. They are logical impossibilities. In the same manner, asking the question "Can God make a rock so big He cannot lift it?" is essentially to ask "Can God's power defeat His own power?" This is nonsensical and a category error since the question is being incorrectly applied. Greg Koukl has stated, "The question is nonsense because it treats God as if He were two instead of one. The phrase 'stronger than' can only be used when two subjects are in view...Since God is only one...it makes no sense to ask if He is stronger than Himself."

Problem #3: this question commits a straw man fallacy. The goal of the skeptic who asks this question is to somehow undermine the Christian concept of an omnipotent God. It is thought that if it can be shown there are some things God cannot do, this would prove that God could not be omnipotent and thus could not exist as Christians have traditionally portrayed Him. However, this line of reasoning is attacking a distorted concept of Biblical omnipotence and is therefore guilty of the straw man fallacy.

So what does it mean then that God is omnipotent? Omnipotence doesn't mean that God can do anything. There are actually quite a few things that God cannot do. He cannot make squared circles. He cannot make a one-ended stick. He cannot sin. He cannot improve His morality. So God is limited in a sense. But not one of these "limitations" has to do with power, rather, they are logical contradictions. Also, notice that His "limitations" are not due to any defects in His character or power but rather they are the result of His perfection and rational nature! As Norman Geisler has stated, "He is only 'limited' by His unlimited perfection." To say that God is omnipotent then is to say that God can do anything so long as it is logically possible and consistent with His nature. God's omnipotence does not mean that He can do what is impossible but only that He can do whatever is actually possible.

Conclusion: So what then is the answer? Can God make a rock so big He cannot lift it? My comments above put aside, I still like the way one particular 7-year-old responded: "I can't give you a smart answer to a dumb question."

*************************************************

The old "willing or able" diatribe asked countless times here by those who never search it and somehow always think they are original! Chris Tiegreen answers you this way..."He is both willing and able! The problem is not with God's power and it's not with his love, it is with our faith. When God doesn't resolve a situation to our liking, especially in which the suffering is great, we are tempted to accuse Him of either impotence or negligence. Jesus' response tells us to look within...unanswered prayer is a call to come closer, look deeper, know God better, and seek His will further. It's a call to be transformed as a disciple and to be conformed to the image of Christ. By such the Father separates those who desire to test Him from those who desire to know Him."
Bravo, that is one explanation of the question. OTOH, the absence of gods also explains the question equally well. The presence of gods who aren't omnipotent is another perfectly logical explanation.
"As usual... it depends."

Namelesss
Posts: 499
Joined: November 15th, 2017, 1:59 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by Namelesss » January 13th, 2018, 6:29 pm

LuckyR wrote:
January 13th, 2018, 2:27 am
Bravo, that is one explanation of the question. OTOH, the absence of gods also explains the question equally well.

I don't think so; the very question assumes a God ("Can God...").
The presence of gods who aren't omnipotent is another perfectly logical explanation.
Again, uh uh.
The question is about an Omni- God/Universe, specifically.
Omni- means the only One! No 'smaller gods', no 'other', no context.
So, that might be a 'perfectly logical' explanation, but not for the question as presented.

Wayne92587
Posts: 1756
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: The God paradox

Post by Wayne92587 » January 14th, 2018, 3:44 pm

"unto him all things are possible"
When did God say that??

When man speaks of the sacred knowledge, in fact when man speaks of any sacred knowledge it results in an Abomination, in Bull Crap.

Wayne92587
Posts: 1756
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: The God paradox

Post by Wayne92587 » January 14th, 2018, 4:00 pm

Can God Make a Rock So Big He Cannot Lift It?
This is the same type of question as if there is a God why is there Evil.

God does not do Good and Evil nor does God create rocks.

God's Creation beginning with the Reality of First Cause is the cause of the system of Chaos from which all of the material World of Reality is Born.

Evil exists as a Material Reality only through the acts of Lucifer's Followers; Man is the purveyor of Evil, not God, God giving man the Freedom to do as he will.

Namelesss
Posts: 499
Joined: November 15th, 2017, 1:59 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by Namelesss » January 14th, 2018, 7:42 pm

Wayne92587 wrote:
January 14th, 2018, 3:44 pm
When man speaks of the sacred knowledge, in fact when man speaks of any sacred knowledge it results in an Abomination, in Bull Crap.
The once 'arcane' becomes the mundane.
Once arcane Knowledge became airplanes.
Etc.

Yes, as often happens in science, today's 'truths' often turn into obsolete nonsense.

Remember the 'arcane knowledge' in the Star Trek series involving a 'replicator? A '3-D printer'? It's already a relatively mundane appliance.
Once existing in fantasy/dream, 'condensing' into our everyday life.

Arcane Knowledge is based, to some extent, on experience.
The experience grows, is shared, and the arcane becomes mundane.

Wayne92587
Posts: 1756
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: The God paradox

Post by Wayne92587 » January 15th, 2018, 2:09 pm

Arcane Knowledge is based, to some extent, on experience.
True , experienced but only as a Reality, an Illlusion in the Mind.

Namelesss
Posts: 499
Joined: November 15th, 2017, 1:59 am

Re: The God paradox

Post by Namelesss » January 15th, 2018, 10:01 pm

Wayne92587 wrote:
January 15th, 2018, 2:09 pm
Arcane Knowledge is based, to some extent, on experience.
True , experienced but only as a Reality, an Illlusion in the Mind.
All that is experienced; Universe/Reality/Truth... is an 'illusion of the Mind'!
What you are looking at is not what you are seeing! *__-

Post Reply