Can two omnipotent beings exist at the same time?

Uriahharris · Post by **Uriahharris** » July 25th, 2014, 11:14 pm

In regards to omnipotency and its many problems . I thought about what would happen if there were two omnipotent beings existing in the same frame of time. Would this be possible, and if so why? If you feel this is not possible, then why not?

Spectrum · Post by **Spectrum** » July 26th, 2014, 1:04 am

'Omni' is the absolute all, whole, total and the likes.
IN THEORY, thus no there cannot be two omnipotent beings existing at the same time.

Note the ontological argument,
an omnipotent being would imply,
a being than which no greater [potency] can be conceived.

Theophane · Post by **Theophane** » July 26th, 2014, 2:24 pm

There was an entire race of such beings in the Star Trek Universe, the Q Continuum. Theoretically, how could the Continuum impose its collective will on a single member of its species? John de Lancie's Q --the definitive Q-- was once stripped of his omnipotence as punishment for his behaviour. Though certainly all-powerful compared to Capt. Picard & crew, Q de Lancie probably wasn't quite as omnipotent as he claimed to be.

Atreyu · Post by **Atreyu** » July 26th, 2014, 5:29 pm

I say 'no' by definition, as Spectrum suggests. 'Omnipotency' implies no peers....

Uriahharris · Post by **Uriahharris** » July 27th, 2014, 12:15 am

Spectrum wrote:'Omni' is the absolute all, whole, total and the likes.
IN THEORY, thus no there cannot be two omnipotent beings existing at the same time.

Note the ontological argument,
an omnipotent being would imply,
a being than which no greater [potency] can be conceived.

However, if omnipotence transcends physics and time (making it truly omnipotent) and even paradox and contradiction, could then not two omnipotent beings exist since time, physics, paradox, and contradiction do not apply as their power (knowledge, physical, mental) exceed the capacity of laws themselves?

Neopolitan · Post by **Neopolitan** » July 27th, 2014, 7:27 am

Given that an omnipotent being could, by definition, replicate itself ... I guess so. Once you start ignoring the logical incoherence of omnipotence, you might as well permit all of the paradoxical ramifications. An omnipotent being could also destroy itself ... unless of course it was both timeless and omnipresent (since the act of destruction would be within time - there'd be the omnipresent pre-destruction era and the apresent post-destruction) - but, supposedly, the omniscience would allow that being to know what is going to happen post-destruction, and the pre-destruction omnipotence would permit the being to act in the future, post its own destruction and it would, therefore be present in the future, after it had destroyed itself ... so, well, you get the point. It's a mess.

Atreyu · Post by **Atreyu** » July 27th, 2014, 11:22 am

Uriahharris wrote:However, if omnipotence transcends physics and time (making it truly omnipotent) and even paradox and contradiction, could then not two omnipotent beings exist since time, physics, paradox, and contradiction do not apply as their power (knowledge, physical, mental) exceed the capacity of laws themselves?

No, because you're not considering that each entity could resist/oppose the aim of the other. The existence of two entities implies they could oppose each other, fight each other. Hence either it is a stalemate in which neither entity proves to be omnipotent, or else one overcomes the other, proving that it alone is the omnipotent one.

But, like Neopolitan said, the issue is a mess mainly because such an entity actually could not exist.

Theophane · Post by **Theophane** » July 27th, 2014, 12:33 pm

You don't know what you don't know, Atreyu.

Londoner · Post by **Londoner** » July 27th, 2014, 2:03 pm

Uriahharris wrote:In regards to omnipotency and its many problems . I thought about what would happen if there were two omnipotent beings existing in the same frame of time. Would this be possible, and if so why? If you feel this is not possible, then why not?

It is impossible; but that has nothing to do with the number but the existing. If we say 'X exists' that implies that we can distinguish it from things which are 'not X'. But 'omnipotent X' embraces everything, therefore it does not exist in that sense.

It is like asking 'what would happen if we multiplied infinity by two'? That would be to mistake 'infinity' for a number. This is to mistake the description 'infinite being' for the name of an object.

Teralek · Post by **Teralek** » July 30th, 2014, 5:31 am

Actually they cannot even exist at DIFFERENT TIMES, so for sure not at the SAME TIME! Omnipotence means even the ability to "be" at any time!

Ruskin · Post by **Ruskin** » July 30th, 2014, 3:34 pm

I think it would be something like having an unblockable force hitting an unmovable object so a paradox, that's why there is only the one God.

Teralek · Post by **Teralek** » July 30th, 2014, 3:52 pm

You don't get away that easy Ruskin, because prescience and free will arë mutually exclusive. They cause a paradox. It's like you can choose yellow or blue but you already know what you are going to choose... Thus you are nothing but an automaton.

A Poster He or I · Post by **A Poster He or I** » July 30th, 2014, 4:38 pm

There is a precedent for 2 all-powerful gods in history, however one was only able to wield Good, but the other only Evil, so you might call it circumscribed omnipotence, or perhaps complementary omnipotence. I am speaking of the 5th century A.D. neo-orthodox phase of Zoroastrianism which was the State religion of the Persian Empire at that time.

This pure dualism posited Good and Evil as two ontological substances embodied in the god of good, Ahura Mazda, and the god of evil, Aingra Manyu (i.e., the Devil). Ahura Mazda wielded the power to create and renew, and to speak truth, while the Devil could only destroy and subvert, and speak lies. The Zoroastrian scripture, The Avesta, describes how Ahura Mazda created the material universe as a trap to ensnare the Devil who would be unable to resist entering it and trying to subvert it. Ahura Mazda knew he would win in the end, because he is omniscient of the truth, meaning he can see the future, which the Devil could not.

Uriahharris · Post by **Uriahharris** » July 30th, 2014, 6:37 pm

Teralek wrote:Actually they cannot even exist at DIFFERENT TIMES, so for sure not at the SAME TIME! Omnipotence means even the ability to "be" at any time!

This is not the regarded definition of omnipotence that we have discussed. Omnipotence=all powerful. All powerful means just as you said but is not limited to it. They can very well transcend time, at the same time being at a specific point in it.

-- Updated July 30th, 2014, 6:39 pm to add the following --

A Poster He or I wrote:There is a precedent for 2 all-powerful gods in history, however one was only able to wield Good, but the other only Evil, so you might call it circumscribed omnipotence, or perhaps complementary omnipotence. I am speaking of the 5th century A.D. neo-orthodox phase of Zoroastrianism which was the State religion of the Persian Empire at that time.

This pure dualism posited Good and Evil as two ontological substances embodied in the god of good, Ahura Mazda, and the god of evil, Aingra Manyu (i.e., the Devil). Ahura Mazda wielded the power to create and renew, and to speak truth, while the Devil could only destroy and subvert, and speak lies. The Zoroastrian scripture, The Avesta, describes how Ahura Mazda created the material universe as a trap to ensnare the Devil who would be unable to resist entering it and trying to subvert it. Ahura Mazda knew he would win in the end, because he is omniscient of the truth, meaning he can see the future, which the Devil could not.

In no way does omnipotence, or my question reflect good and evil, who h are based off of perspective. Omnipotence=all powerful. This does not help enlighten us towards the answering of the discussion nor question.

A Poster He or I · Post by **A Poster He or I** » July 31st, 2014, 5:15 pm

In no way does omnipotence, or my question reflect good and evil, who h are based off of perspective. Omnipotence=all powerful. This does not help enlighten us towards the answering of the discussion nor question.

Your assumption that good and evil are merely matters of perspective is just a bias you have from your own culture, as is the idea that omnipotence must be monolithic. A Zoroastrian thinks otherwise: Good and Evil are most definitely NOT matters of perspective; they are ontologically irreducible primaries. They have no trouble at all imagining omnipotence being comprised of 2 complementary opposites.