Can God create a rock so heavy that he himself can't lift it?
>>1333065
No, because the existence of such a rock would entail that he is not omnipotent. God cannot do things that entail a lack of power on his part. Certain activities are the result of lack of power, as opposed to an abundance of power. For example, you can only be healed if you can be damaged, God also lacks the ability to be healed, because to be healed requires that he first be hurt, which would be a negative attribute to him that would entail a limitation on his power. There are some things God cannot do, as a result of his omnipotence, as opposed to being due to a supposed lack of omnipotence.
![62fd3d023bae32b4fd3eda5288bf898e-d8mmafo[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/h43jBSV.png "62fd3d023bae32b4fd3eda5288bf898e-d8mmafo[1].png")
>>1333065
No he can't because God doesn't exist.
>>1333325
op on suicide watch holy shit
>>1333319
But could God purposely put a limit to his own power in order to create a rock too heavy for him to lift?
Like, the same way a really ripped guy could purposely only use a tiny fraction of his strength and pretend he's weaker to make his lanky friend feel better about himself?
Obviously God could use his full power at any time, but since he is all powerful, could he not change the parameters of his power at any time, even temporarily?
>can God create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?
If we assume god's maximum force output to be unlimited, he is capable of accelerating any object of any mass to any speed.
Therefore, if we filled the entire universe with the densest material possible, god should still be able to move it.
HOWEVER - if the entire universe is filled with material, gravity pulls towards the center of the universe: that's the direction known as "down".
And if you lift something, it moves away from "down".
If the entire universe is full, and god is moving the entire universe, no matter what direction god moves the universe in points away from down, and god is NOT lifting the universe.
Therefore we can conclude it is possible for God to create a rock so heavy that it is impossible for him to lift it, or for it to be lifted at all.
>>1333065
Weight isn't a property of one object, mass is.
>>1333065
"creating a rock too heavy for a being who can lift anything to lift" is an oxymoron. It's impossible for it to exist. That statement doesn't even signify anything; it's just a meaningless jumble of letters.
A being who can do anyTHING won't be able to create such a rock, since such a rock can never be a thing.
Omnipotence is the power to do anything, but logical contradictions aren't things at all.
so no
also, kill yourself fucking frogposter
>>1333357
you didn't understand the point of his argument, He's saying that the inability to create a rock that oneself can't lift is itself the reason for his all- powerfulness; if he were able to create such a rock, it would actually be an indicator of weakness in the same way that the ability to heal is a sign of weakness
yes, all he has to do is throw himself in a limiting experience, and if god is beyond all physical matter then its all illusive to him, he'd just have to throw himself into that delusion.
>>1333065
Can god create an entity superior to him?
>>1333389
So logic is above god, it binds his actions, he does not dictate it?
>>1333421
he did when he created women
>>1333389
This implies that God is restrained by logic. Why then would you call it God?
Is God capable of evil or is his power limited to only be able to do good?
>>1333433
God precedes logic. Its rules come from him; he isn't bound by its rules.
You can say that God is logic, in a sense.
That's the high church Christian answer at least. Most Protestants and probably most deists don't believe that. That's definitely an issue with their theology.
>>1333482
Then why can he not do things that would be illogical by current laws of logic, does he not determine the laws of logic?
If god is logic, you'll have to explain how logic itself has a mind.
>>1333491
I don't think that "determine the laws of logic" is the best way to put it. It's not like God arbitrarily decides what the laws of logic should be. They flow from his nature. They can't change because God's nature can't change. God's nature can't change because God, who is commonly defined as a perfect being, would be imperfect if he had the ability to change- if he could change, he would be one thing in one instant and another thing in the next and then lack the thing that made him what he was in the previous instant. And lacking something is not compatible with perfection.
>If god is logic, you'll have to explain how logic itself has a mind.
Do I? Common definitions of God usually include "perfect" and "thinking," so the very fact that we're talking about God means that we're taking for granted the fact that he (or at least the idea of him) has a mind. Unless you're using a different definition of "God."
Yes.
However this is to imply God has human arms in the scenario.
But then how would God lift the rock?
We all can't do something until we prove we can do it, for example there are dumbell weights we can't lift right now until we gain the strength to do so.
So eventually He can lift the hypothetical rock and then make another one He can't lift for His own enjoyment, and then He will do hypothetical weight training to lift it once more.
>>1333517
Do you think god is natty?
>>1333065
Yeah
And then he lifts it even though he can't lift it because fuck you he's omnipotent
The whole idea stems from people that don't know what omnipotence is
Unless you aren't talking about omnipotent god then it probably could because the fact you can create something doesn't mean you have perfect control over it
>>1333357
Well God could pretend to not be able to lift a rock. But that would be totally different from God actually not being able to lift it. He could temporarily decide to only use a fraction of his power without violating his omnipotence. If God HAD to use his full power at all times then we would live in a very different world after all. For one, every possible individual who could exist with the other set of individuals would have to exist. I think it is quite given that God does not use all of his power at every moment, unless you believe that every possible world is an actual world or something like that.
One theological example that fits this point is the Scholastic conception of potentia ordinata and the potentia absoluta: The idea that God has a "normal order" aka our set of "natural laws", how God normally runs things, as opposed to his absolute power, which could be used to suspend all the contingencies in the natural order, since it is the ultimate power that founds the natural order itself.
>>1333419
"Laws of nature" are just abstractions we use to systematize properties of created things. God decides on these generalities, he is not bound by them.
Not sure about the second one.
>>1333433
I would argue that we should not treat "logic" as if it is an entity. 'Logic" is a human discipline meant to determine right reasoning, and there are many different logics. The real question in this case is whether or not the principle of non contradiction holds, and from whence the claim that it does not arises from? According to Aristotle it comes from mental confusion, once you state something you have excluded that which contradicts it. To then state that contradictory thing also holds means that you have said nothing. So looking for something that actually denies PONC in human reasoning is a mistake. It could also be that the true logical order is just an abstraction based on what we abstract from God and his ultimate power, maybe PONC is a part of that.
