DBrant

Just wondering what the general concensus was on the question, "can god create a stone that he can't lift?" But then I thought of a more refined version of the question: (several, actually)

- Can God create another God?

- Can God create a god more powerful than himself?

- Can God destroy himself?

- If God destroyed himself, would we notice?


(why or why not for each)

Taffy Lewis

DBrant,

There is a solution to the "paradox of the stone". It begins by noting that omnipotence does not include the power to do that which is logically impossible. Next, consider the following statement (S):

• It is logically possible that (a)God is omnipotent and (b)there exists a stone too heavy for God to lift.

Statement (S) is either true or false. If statement (S) is true then God can create a stone too heavy for him to lift while remaining omnipotent. If the statement is true then both (a) and (b) can be the case at the same time.

And if statement (S) is false then God's inability to create a stone too heavy for him to lift and remain omnipotent is not something that is logically possible and thus isn't something an omnipotent being is required to be capable of.

So God is omnipotent whether (S) is true or false.

Lastly, if one requires that omnipotence include the ability to do the logically impossible then no paradox can pose a difficulty for the concept.

happyboy

if God is omnipotent, then He can do anything. the bible proposes that nothing is beyond God. therefore, God CAN create something stronger than Himself; He CAN create a boulder too heavy for Himself to lift; and He CAN wink Himself out of existence. to deny that He can do these things is to deny He is omnipotent.

happyboy

Grumpy

DBrant's "refined" paradoxes seem to fit comfortably into Taffy Lewis' logical proposition.

Yes, there is a logical contradiction if you say A) God can do anything, and B) there is something God cannot do.

But creating another God or destroying himself do not contradict proposition A. In that sense, then, they are not paradoxes. But they do make you wonder....

Jinto

Well here's my take on it:

Q1: Can God create another God?

A: Yes. He may or may not choose to make this god omnipotent. If he does choose to do this however, it is important to note that this second God would have the ability to destroy the first God, beinhg that he is also all powerful. I can imagine that they would set up some knd of mutually assured destruction process in order to insure that they don't kill each other over the following:

God1: Ahh, cheese.
*cheese disappears*
God1: Hey, who moved my cheese?
God2: Hehehe.

Q2: Can God create a god more powerful than himself?

A: No. Since omnipotence means the power to do all that which is logically possible, it is not possible for a being to exist (created or not) that is more powerful than an omnipotent being, and it would be no more possible for Him to create this than it would be for Him to create a square circle.

Q3: Can God destroy himself?

A: Yes. In fact, if you listen to Scott Adams in his book God's Debris, it may be his only logical course of action.

Q4: If God destroyed himself, would we notice?

A: That depends on whether or not He took care of his own debris, wouldn't it?

Q5: Can God create a rock so heavy he cannot lift it?

A: The only way to do that would be to first limit His power to lift rocks to a finite value, in which case He would no longer be omnipotent.

Q6: What makes you think you're qualified to answer questions about God's omnipotence when you don't even believe in Him?

A: Arrogance.

Theli

It's the idea of the heavy rock example that god cannot remain omnipotent.
If god has created the rock he cannot lift, then he has in doing so created something more powerfull than himself. The power of the rock's gravitation exceeds his power of lifting.
It isnt' logically impossible if you view it as 2 actions (as it really is).
1. Creating something more powerfull than himself.
2. Overpowering his creation.
If god's ability and strength was infinite then he would fail at 1.
If god's ability and strength was finite then we would fail at 2.
No logical fallacies here.
One ability can eliminate another, if you are asleep you cannot fall asleep, if you are awake you cannot wake up.

Theli

I'll view all this as a hypothesis, as you have neither provided evidence for god or his power to create other gods.
But I would like to ask you, if the second god can destroy the first god, can the first god survive the "destruction-attack" from the second god?
...and vice versa.

Jinto

I'm not providing evidence to support the existence of God, that the theists' job. (I'm atheist)

No, as that would clearly limit the power of the second God. This is why it would be inadvisable for one God to create another God that is truly omnipotent, as opposed to merely near-omnipotent, however the advisability of creating another omnipotent being has nothing to do with its possibility.

By the way, this wouldn't be a case of one God attacking the other so much as deleting them from existence. I think of it as a server where two users have root-level access, and either can delete the others account.

sandlewood

I would rather not qualify omnipotent power by saying that it cannot do that which is logically impossible. I’d prefer to say that omnipotence itself is logically impossible. That is, the idea of infinite power is meaningless. I don’t think the concept of infinity is something you can just apply to anything.


“Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it?”
- Homer Simpson

Darkblade

I think that this thread has already shown that omnipotence is nonsensical, limited by logic or not. But, in any case,…

- Can God create a stone that he can't lift?

I don’t believe it is logically possible to create something (in the sense we are talking about for “God”) without quantitizing (not a real word, but it should be) its qualities. Therefore God could not create an infinitely heavy stone, because God could finitely specify his power after creating the stone (and the other mass besides itself to which it was attracted gravitationally, the other mass’ location or distance relative to the stone (obviously, a stone in a void could be moved, but, ironically, all movement would be meaningless, since a void is the same everywhere, so it would be just as if the stone had not been moved), and proving that the stone would be lifted, by demonstrating that the direction he would move it was congruous with “up” (all finitely defined, of course)) to be great enough to cause the stone to be lifted.

- Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it?

If Jesus is defined as God, no, for the same reasons as above.

- Can God create another God?

If we assume that omnipotence is a finite quality (in its potency), () yes. (It isn’t, because any value, despite being finite, can be specified for any quality (and there are no limits on the amount of qualities that can be instantiated either).)
If omnipotence is an infinite quality, it can not be imbued upon a creation because God could not logically comprehend it. (Then how did God come to be omnipotent?)

The only loophole is having God, in a finite amount of time, think of every one of the infinite qualities, things, or actions and potencies, values, or quantities (and all possible combinations of these) which could be created or done, or imbued upon objects, and, in a finite amount of time, ascribe them all to this new God. Note that this would not require God to define or comprehend the concept of infinity. Unfortunately, this would logically require God possessing time-traveling abilities to do. (If God “could”, or had to “do” it in an infinite amount of time, it would never be done.) So, the real question here is whether time travel is possible (in a way that would logically allow God this ability) or not. Also, if something can logically cause itself (it seems unlikely, or, at least, counter-logical (although if, in another loophole, because nothing (somehow (nothing should force something to exist, logically, due to nothing also entailing no rules or laws existing, therefore things would randomly cause themselves (although it is dubious that this would cause God) or occur (universe? (one possibility))) existed, God could use himself as his own “reference point” (like how space only can exist (philosophically) because there is matter-energy (which is defined as that necessary something, and is, in essence, nothing but movements seamlessly effecting each other) to fill it, and time exists to determine how matter-energy moves through space (it can not logically be undefined)) instantaneously (using time travel again, I suppose))), and time travel in a proper fashion is possible, God could (or would have, supposing his existence, rather) create(d) himself, getting himself out one of his famous problems.

- Can God create a god more powerful than himself?

No, because omnipotence is an infinite quality, and therefore can not logically be improved upon.

- Can God destroy himself?

I don’t see why not.

- If God destroyed himself, would we notice?

Considering that we haven’t noticed yet (and assuming that God isn’t the universe or some properly observable part of it, and that, by, or, for not apparent reason, destroying himself he causes something properly observable and noticeable to happen), I doubt it.

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((I’m sorry…))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))