Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If god is all powerful can he make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?
You just failed philosophy 101
While grammatically that is a properly constructed sentence it is nonsensical and self contradictory.
A young persons idea that they have discovered a profound thought. the question itself eliminates its possibility of being a valid concept. Nonsense disguised as wisdom.
Isaac Asimov probably summed it up best with his answer to the similar and related irresistible force paradox.
Isaac Asimov, a confirmed atheist, answered a variation of this question: what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object? He points out that Albert Einstein demonstrated the equivalence of mass-energy. That is, according to relativity theory, mass is simply frozen energy, energy is simply liquid mass. In order to be either "immovable" or "irresistible", the entity must possess the majority of energy in the system. No system can have two majorities. A universe in which there exists such a thing as an irresistible force is, by definition, a universe which cannot also contain an immovable object. And a universe which contains an immovable object cannot, by definition, also contain an irresistible force. So the question is essentially meaningless: either the force is irresistible or the object is immovable, but not both. Asimov points out that this question is the logical fallacy of the pseudo-question. Just because we can string words together to form what looks like a coherent sentence doesn't mean the sentence really makes any sense.
You just failed philosophy 101
While grammatically that is a properly constructed sentence it is nonsensical and self contradictory.
A young persons idea that they have discovered a profound thought. the question itself eliminates its possibility of being a valid concept. Nonsense disguised as wisdom.
Isaac Asimov probably summed it up best with his answer to the similar and related irresistible force paradox.
Isaac Asimov, a confirmed atheist, answered a variation of this question: what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object? He points out that Albert Einstein demonstrated the equivalence of mass-energy. That is, according to relativity theory, mass is simply frozen energy, energy is simply liquid mass. In order to be either "immovable" or "irresistible", the entity must possess the majority of energy in the system. No system can have two majorities. A universe in which there exists such a thing as an irresistible force is, by definition, a universe which cannot also contain an immovable object. And a universe which contains an immovable object cannot, by definition, also contain an irresistible force. So the question is essentially meaningless: either the force is irresistible or the object is immovable, but not both. Asimov points out that this question is the logical fallacy of the pseudo-question. Just because we can string words together to form what looks like a coherent sentence doesn't mean the sentence really makes any sense. SOURCE
Well said, Wood. I miss Isaac. He was a fellow Mensan and a gifted writer of both science and some of my favorite science fiction.
While grammatically that is a properly constructed sentence it is nonsensical and self contradictory.
A young persons idea that they have discovered a profound thought. the question itself eliminates its possibility of being a valid concept. Nonsense disguised as wisdom.
Isaac Asimov probably summed it up best with his answer to the similar and related irresistible force paradox.
Isaac Asimov, a confirmed atheist, answered a variation of this question: what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object? He points out that Albert Einstein demonstrated the equivalence of mass-energy. That is, according to relativity theory, mass is simply frozen energy, energy is simply liquid mass. In order to be either "immovable" or "irresistible", the entity must possess the majority of energy in the system. No system can have two majorities. A universe in which there exists such a thing as an irresistible force is, by definition, a universe which cannot also contain an immovable object. And a universe which contains an immovable object cannot, by definition, also contain an irresistible force. So the question is essentially meaningless: either the force is irresistible or the object is immovable, but not both. Asimov points out that this question is the logical fallacy of the pseudo-question. Just because we can string words together to form what looks like a coherent sentence doesn't mean the sentence really makes any sense.
I think that's the essence of the question, not an anwer. As a fan of Asimov (his Guide to the Bible is a fantastic investigation of the secular aspects of it), I appreciate the "answer" given above, but I think that he is just reformulating the problem, and for the sake of the argument one can overlook certain things: the point of the question is that it IS a paradox. There IS a problem in even asking the question.
Can an all-powerful being create something that he is powerless to effect? Perhaps that is another way of asking it. Either way - the point of the question is probably meant to destroy the idea that God is All-Powerful (because of the paradox, as pointed out by Asimov), as well as being just an interesting little puzzle.
Well, people redecorate their homes pretty frequently sometimes.
Is it possible that a limitless God would be satisfied with just one state of being? Would he not be tempted to constantly change it, in order to not be limited? Maybe this is a reaction against Leibniz and his "this is the best possible of all worlds", for God created it, and thus it must be perfect - no matter what happens (according to Leibniz).
I like Woodrow's (Asimov's) answer. Never heard that explanation before.
Funny, but when I was a teenager, I fancied myself an agnostic or athiest. It felt very cutting edge at the time. And this was one of the "proofs" I always brought to any discussions on the existence of G-d.
It's nice to finally have a possible answer to the 14 year-old FlipFlop.
If god is all powerful can he make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?
Yes of course - God is so powerful that he is capable of making himself powerless - perfect example - Jesus on the cross...IT all depends on your understanding of power - In our world we think of it as being a phyiscal thing - In the etneral world - the laws of OUR physics do not apply...
So when God is powerless in our eyes - he is...and so what...our kind of power is meaninless anyway...I have often thought of this concept - that real power is no power...If you get my drift - after all - what human being on earth can extend their life by a second..once you are at your due date? We have no power....and if we have none - I assume that in regards to us - God does not need any - anyway to deal with us...it's all very strange.
Yes of course - God is so powerful that he is capable of making himself powerless
With respect, the question isn't about whether God can render himself powerless -- it's about whether or not paradox applies to God.
Simply put: Can an all-powerful being create an impossible situation?
Such events would require that the supposedly 'all-powerful' being set an artificial limit to its power -- something that is logically plausible (since it is all-powerful and can do anything it wishes), but impossible in practice (since one can't be 'all-powerful' if that power has even an artificially-imposed limit).
What we run up against is a classic no-win scenario: If God can't create the rock, he's not 'omnipotent'. If God can create the rock (but not lift it) he's disproved his own omnipotence by default.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
