(Untitled)

[galdor_seregon]

So I was talking with my friend Nick about the omnipotence paradox:

i.e. "could an omnipotent being create a rock that was so heavy even he could not lift it?"

the argument is that:
if God can create such a rock, his omnipotence is flawed because God cannot lift the rock.
if God cannot create such a rock, his omnipotence is flawed, his

Comments

[hardcore_irish]

You've never heard that question before?

Or the more comical, "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that even He could not eat it?"

[automobile]

i'm lovin' it!

[galdor_seregon]

i'd heard it before, but someone posed the question to me seriously, so i responded accordingly.

i like the burrito question better.

[lowendurance]

I think a better question would be: to what end would an omnipotent being do such a thing? Just to test his/her own omnipotence, or flaunt it, or what? The way I see it, the miraculous and the supernatural both require purpose. In turn, purpose indicates character, which this particular paradox does not take into account. So, there's a problem with that.

These are just thoughts on the page, but hear me out: if I were omnipotent, I'd probably try something stupid sooner or later, just to see if I could. Like, for instance, creating a rock so heavy even I couldn't lift it. And then the universe would fold on itself, or whatever. That's the premise, right? Well, have you ever seen that movie, Bruce Almighty? He was omnipotent (well, almost...he couldn't make anyone love him), but he still did stupid crap. He wasn't perfect. God is perfect. Or, maybe, perfectly omnipotent! God can only do perfect things? Not TRUE omnipotence in the way that we think of it, but that's because of what Will said.

Make any sense?

[galdor_seregon]

yeah,

what would God's sentiments be to try and create a rock too heavy for him to lift it? Any reason I can think of is selfish on God's part.

Thus, God even trying to create the stone makes him not omnipotent.

God doesn't have to prove himself to his creations