Thief
Rogue Theologian
Creator .....would be omnipotent
and somewhere it is written....'as if you were never born'
a lean to uncreation
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Answer to Paradox of Stone
- Thread starter hispanicmormon
- Start date
and somewhere it is written....'as if you were never born'
a lean to uncreation
Why's that?
Darryl Lankford
Member
There is a solution to the "Paradox of the Stone" which utilizes the powers associated with omnipotence to nullify the question. It's called the "Circular God Counter-paradox." The effect of this response creates a unique situation where anyone asking the stone paradox question becomes trapped within a paradox of equal measure.
-- God is able to simultaneously perform both tasks without compromising omnipotence.
The end result is that the "Paradox of the Stone" question becomes irrelevant. For over 800 years this question has prevailed because the majority of responses focused on the legitimacy of the question and not providing an actual answer. The "Circular God Counter Paradox" directly addresses the question with a third response which supersedes the perceived "yes or no" requirement of the question:
"God can lift the stone and not lift the stone at the exact same moment."
...Here is a detailed video clip that explains how the "Circular God Counter-paradox" is designed and also addresses the many challenges/questions offered to this resolution. (Video Link)
-Darryl
-- God is able to simultaneously perform both tasks without compromising omnipotence.
The end result is that the "Paradox of the Stone" question becomes irrelevant. For over 800 years this question has prevailed because the majority of responses focused on the legitimacy of the question and not providing an actual answer. The "Circular God Counter Paradox" directly addresses the question with a third response which supersedes the perceived "yes or no" requirement of the question:
"God can lift the stone and not lift the stone at the exact same moment."
...Here is a detailed video clip that explains how the "Circular God Counter-paradox" is designed and also addresses the many challenges/questions offered to this resolution. (Video Link)
-Darryl
Thief
Rogue Theologian
and your solution is sufficient?
the paradox is proposed in the first place by people who have difficulty believing .....God
can set a universe in motion
and then can't do anything about it
eg......life on this planet has been set in motion
and God can do nothing to help us....
the paradox is proposed in the first place by people who have difficulty believing .....God
can set a universe in motion
and then can't do anything about it
eg......life on this planet has been set in motion
and God can do nothing to help us....
Darryl Lankford
Member
...The Circular God Counter-paradox is far more than "sufficient.". It goes much farther in its ability to nullify the Stone Paradox question in the process. However, if you feel this counter-paradoxical response does not directly answer the Stone Paradox question or is in some way flawed, then please explain exactly how it has failed to do so or how you feel that it is flawed.
...The earliest documented historical discussion of the Stone Paradox dates back to the 12th century and is attributed to a Muslim philosopher known as Averroës who defended Aristotelian philosophy. There is no record of any reasoning or rationale regarding why the Stone paradox was ever asked in the first place other than to use paradoxical logic (a paradox) in an attempt to eliminate the concept of an omnipotent God.
...If this represents a personal concept you hold regarding the abilities of the Creator, then you are certainly free to feel this way, but that has nothing to do with the "Paradox of the Stone" question. That would be better suited in a debate regarding Deism.
-Darryl
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I often confuse people
and the Paradox is offered to do exactly that
people who do not under stand strength compared to the power of creation
have no answer
as for my perspective....
God as creator has set an entire universe in motion
that would be a great deal more than a rock
however, having set the scheme of things (reality) into a firm formation......
He is not likely to undo any of it to spare any of us
reality to be reality......it cannot be twisted for your sake
and so it is....
reality is a stone.....God will not move
Darryl Lankford
Member
...Just so we have a clear understanding, you are not arguing that the Circular God Counter-paradox has not adequately resolved the Stone Paradox question nor have you found a flaw nested in the response, correct?
...This is a very creative, imaginative and personal understanding you have of God, but it is not related to the logical trap which is nested within the Stone Paradox. Your broad brush synopsis of God' would be similar to presenting a philosophical argument regarding universal transportation to someone who is merely making engine valve repairs on their SUV.
And for the record, I am an artist. I have a solid plan established ahead of time for every painting I create. However, I make numerous changes throughout the panting process. I make these changes because it pleases me to do so, it is my choice to make whatever changes I desire and I have the sole power and discretion to make these changes.
...Only the "artist" can truthfully speak for his creations.
-Darryl
Thief
Rogue Theologian
ah yes....and I have posted repeatedly over the years....
you know the Artist....by His creation
Tony L Smith
Tony
I know this is an older forum thread but I just wanted to comment on it.
The stone itself wasn't given the ability to resist. Yet it is infused with life that makes it desire to respond. The thought of this stone lifting question only makes sense in a non-relational existence between the stone (whether growing or not) and God. This question implies that the stone does not know its creator therefore it may not work as one. Only man was given the God-like ability to resist his creator and yet live as a creator.
"Sufficient" seems overly charitable.
It misses the whole point of the Stone Paradox.
The question that the paradox is getting at is this: can God thwart his own will?
- if no, then there's something God can't do (and therefore he isn't omnipotent).
- if yes, then God's will can be thwarted (and therefore he isn't omnipotent).
Semantic games to get rid of the conflict do nothing to answer the question of what happens when the conflict does occur.
crowfeather
One
God doesn't lift stones, because God is the stone, the container that contains the stone, and the force that could lift it, if it lifted stones.
God is also the observer of the stone, of the space containing the stone, and witness of the lifting of it, were it being lifted.
This is the least of what God is, but also, in this leastness, is the manifestation of everything not manifested in the anecdote.
Darryl Lankford
Member
...What is insufficient is your response to the Circular God Counter-paradox. A quick, snippy-little "sour grapes" comeback does not adequately demonstrate how this counter-paradox has failed to meet the challenge. Your argument serves as nothing more than an emotional reaction based on frustration.
For over 800 years anyone asking the Stone Paradox question has been met with others attempting to "explain away" the question, argue against the merits of the question or argue that the question is irrelevant. I find it humorous to see that the tables have now been turned on those who ask the Stone Paradox question. They are now the ones reduced to trying to "explain away" the Circular God Counter-paradox response ...just like you are attempting to do right now..
People throughout history who have asked the Stone Paradox were never satisfied with these "explain away" responses. They weren't interested in anything other than a clear and direct response to the question. All of the eloquent theological blathering in the world was never enough to satisfy the challenge established in the Stone Paradox question. This is why it has survived for so long.
Just as those who asked the question were never satisfied with these eloquently-written responses, nor will anyone who now responds with this Circular God Counter-paradox answer be satisfied with someone arguing "You missed the point" or "sufficient seems overly charitable" .,,,No, my friend, all of the witty comebacks, dismissive statements and intellectual blathering in the world will not quell this clear and direct response to the Stone Paradox question..
We're all big boys now, Mr. Penguin. You are required to adequately demonstrate how this Circular God Counter-paradox response is insufficient!
...The point of the Stone Paradox is very specific: It establishes a simpe task for God to achieve. This task has been designed in a deceptively paradoxical way that attempts to eliminate any concept of omnipotence (and God). With this counter-paradoxical response, God has successfully resolved the task while always maintaining His omnipotence. ...That's just a fact, my friend!
An omnipotence paradoxical question that is written in an alternate way would require a counter-paradoxical response specifically designed to address that question.
...Prior to this Circular God Counter-paradox response, it was assumed that an omnipotence paradox must be met with a basic binary-type response (Yes or No). However, when the powers associated with omnipotence come into play, there exists a 3rd option (Yes and No). So if the question surrounds whether or not God can thwart his own will, then God would be able to resolve the question while maintaining omnipotence. There will always exist a "3rd option."
...Again, your response is more in line with what the many who have attempted to answer the Stone Paradox question have argued in response. You are attempting to avoid the situation all together by merely dismissing this counter-paradoxical response.
---Ya gotta do better than that, my friend!
Last edited:
It's designed in a way that God is working against himself. Again: that's the whole point.
What is and isn't a fact remains to be seen. And you aren't my friend.
And does this "3rd option" involve God thwarting his own will or not?
Satans_Serrated_Edge
Deicidal
The hulk is still stronger.
Darryl Lankford
Member
...That's wonderful news, Penguin! Unfortunately I don't care "how" or "why" it was designed. All that is required out of me is an
"answer." The Circular God Counter-paradox delivers the required answer no matter how or why it was designed.
...The fact stands right now that the Paradox of the Stone has been completely negated. If it hasn't been you would have demonstrated so by now. What remains unseen is if you ever find a way to negate the Circular God Counter-paradox response. Then it would be a different story. But until that time happens...................... It remains as fact!
...God is able to thwart his will and not thwart His will at the exact same moment -- unless, of course, you are able to specifically show otherwise????
Can you demonstrate otherwise?
You've used up my benefit of the doubt that you aren't just here to troll. We're done.
Darryl Lankford
Member
Update: Okay, so 9-10ths_Penguin and Thief have both tapped out.
Thief's final input is a curious response parsed with strangely-disjointed sentence structure reminiscent of a haiku.
Penguin's final assessment is that a fully-functional counter-paradoxical resolution to the "Paradox of the Stone" which holds the #1 spot on Quora over 365 other responses since 2010, shows up four separate times on the first page of a Google search, holds the #1 spot on a YouTube video search and has a copyright pending approval by the US Copyright Office is somehow ...the work of a "troll."
Anybody else want to give it a try?
Here is the current solution to the Paradox of the Stone:
Circular God Counter-paradox
...If you can find a flaw within the design of this counter-paradoxical response, please post your observation. If there are no flaws, then this answer serves as the terminal response for the "Paradox of the Stone." Anytime you are presented with the Stone Paradox question, you can use this counter-paradoxical response.
-Darryl
Thief
Rogue Theologian
the resolve is in the terms
consider God to be the Almighty
nothing....bigger, faster, stronger, more intelligent and greatly experienced
and He made the stone
unless of course you would argue......God is dumber than a rock
This like the question of the stone itself boils down to incoherence. Can you make an infinite (x) more infinite than infinity?
As 9-10ths notes:
A nonsensical question. If God wills something thwarted, then that is his will. If he doesn't will it thwarted, whence the thwarting action? Can God's will be not his will?
Simplified, omnipotence demands A = ¬A to retain coherence, and if the law of identity can be broken, so all logic follows. There are two ways to address this, either you submit omnipotence to logic, which means that logic is most superior, or logic is contingent. I argue the latter.