Is ominpotency an intrinsically contradictory term? I have heard people argue that it is by posing questions like "can god made a crossword puzzle so hard that he can't solve it." Then if you say god is not contradictory they will reply then is his limitations in crossword puzzle making or crossword puzzle solving? Can anyone come up with a good response for this question?
-
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!
contradiction of omnipotency?
- Thread starter Brien
- Start date
Lightkeeper
Well-Known Member
Can God take Viagra?
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
HAHA!! Omnipotence is the word he was going for. I do not believe in a god that is able to create and solve a crossword puzzle, I believe in the Tao. The Tao has no gender or human characteristics, therefore it can be perfect and omnipotent. However for sake of conversation, the Tao would create a crossword puzzle that could be perfectly solved and perfectly unsolvable. It is up to beings with perception to make it whatever they wish.
Both are actually accepted uses of the noun. Hope the definition clears things up if anyone is unsure of the meaning of this word.
I guess what you are saying is that your view in this is dependent upon whether you view God as static or dynamic and to what degree you believe he is static or dynamic. A dynamic omnipotent being could create an unsolvable puzzle then could take it a step further and solve it. This process could be repeated infinitely many times until the puzzle has met the criteria of being both solved an unsolvable. But as Aristotle proved, infinity cannot exist in actuality, only hypothetically. Does this mean that omnipotence can only exist hypothetically?
I think it is intrinsically contradictory, Brien - as far as I can see, the problem is simply that omnipotence effectively means that you are the entire universe - everythig, past, present and future. In order to be an individual being separate from other matter, you can't have power over it. Omnipotence implies there is nothing you cannot do; so you can't suddenly decide to do something, because if you didn't know that you were going to do it, you couldn't act on the future (because you didn't know what the future was since you didn't know you would act and so can't know the effects of your action), meaning you wouldn't be omnipotent. Making omnipotence meaningless.
I think it is intrinsically contradictory, Brien - as far as I can see, the problem is simply that omnipotence effectively means that you are the entire universe - everythig, past, present and future. In order to be an individual being separate from other matter, you can't have power over it. Omnipotence implies there is nothing you cannot do; so you can't suddenly decide to do something, because if you didn't know that you were going to do it, you couldn't act on the future (because you didn't know what the future was since you didn't know you would act and so can't know the effects of your action), meaning you wouldn't be omnipotent. Making omnipotence meaningless.
I would define omnipotence to be having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful.
It is sort of a catch 22, since it seems God must abide by the laws which he initially put in place to govern the universe. For example, most Christians believe that God gave humans free will and will not control a human mind. The question then becomes is he incapable of intervening or does he merely choose not to. Even if he was capable then he would be violating his own philosophy.
It is sort of a catch 22, since it seems God must abide by the laws which he initially put in place to govern the universe. For example, most Christians believe that God gave humans free will and will not control a human mind. The question then becomes is he incapable of intervening or does he merely choose not to. Even if he was capable then he would be violating his own philosophy.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
And how could God possibly create a mind that can think for itself? Surely He would know, however He chose to create it, exactly what all its decisions etc. would be as a direct consequence of how he makes it?
The only thing God cannot do is something contrary to his own nature. We know very little about God--only what he has chosen to reveal to us. We are told in Scripture that he has revealed enough for us to be saved and to be guided in our lives, but as Paul says, we see now "through a glass darkly, but then [in the next life] face to face". This verse reminds me of how we argue about predestination and free will and so many other topics that are not knowable by our wonderful yet finite and fallen minds.
But, what we do know is God is just and loving. Therefore, he cannot do anything against those two elements of his nature. Of course, to our finite minds, we often confuse the two and interpose our concept of justice and love upon God; however, God has revealed to us certain aspects of his justice and his love that are sufficient for our purposes in this life to know of his love for us and of the wages of sin.
But, what we do know is God is just and loving. Therefore, he cannot do anything against those two elements of his nature. Of course, to our finite minds, we often confuse the two and interpose our concept of justice and love upon God; however, God has revealed to us certain aspects of his justice and his love that are sufficient for our purposes in this life to know of his love for us and of the wages of sin.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
Brien I would say that the Tao is both static and dynamic.