Z
Zatzat
Guest
Check and mate.
- Status
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Check perhaps, but not mate.
I suppose we fall back to the simple question of WHY God would make a rock he couldn’t lift?
Just because He can doesn’t mean He will. So I’d assume he hasn’t.
I’m sure somebody smart will come up with a better answer than this though.
C
Chanticleer
Guest
I have heard that God has already created a boulder that is too big to move and that boulder is your heart! You have to move it !
R
R_Daneel
Guest
It is a mate all right. And if you play chess, then you will recognize that it is a smothered mate - the most embarrasing one of all.Check perhaps, but not mate.
For fun? Why would God be denied a little innocent fun? But of course, God does not have to give a reason for what he does or does not do. He never gave a reason why he allowed evil to happen, did he? The apologists could never give a reason for that either, no matter how many times this question came up. And that is a much more important question… Furthermore, if a simple contradiction would be an impediment to God’s power, then the laws of logic would be “stronger” than God, which is impossible. God cannot be constrained by some measly, puny little “laws” of logic, can he?
I had a vision once (well, not really, just joking - or maybe not!). In this vision I talked to God, and asked him if he exists. He answered that he does not exist, he never existed, and had no plan or desire to exist in the future. Obviously I was baffled, and asked him, how can he conduct a conversation with me, if he does not exist. He smiled and said: “Oh ye of little faith, why do you doubt my word? Am I not omnipotent? Is there anything I cannot do?”… And he winked and flickered out of existence… So there… this is the ironclad, irrefutable proof (you all asked for) which shows that God does not exist. I learned it from his own mouth, and I cannot doubt it any more. Can you?
S
stephe1987
Guest
That question is self-contradictory and designed to slowly turn people to Atheism if you don’t notice the flaw and pay close attention.
The arguments presented by some people are absurd. If God exists, He would do ____. Well, why would He want to do that? Who are you to decide what God “would” or “should” do? The arrogance… if God doesn’t bow down to their will, they refuse Him.
- God is everywhere. He is infinite in size (also in strength, power, intelligence, etc.).
- Therefore, it is impossible to create a boulder (which is, by definition, finite in size) that is “too big to move”.
The arguments presented by some people are absurd. If God exists, He would do ____. Well, why would He want to do that? Who are you to decide what God “would” or “should” do? The arrogance… if God doesn’t bow down to their will, they refuse Him.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
You are making a nifty little substitution… the question was not whether he “would” or “should”… it was if he “could”??? I am sure you see the huge difference… if the presented question cannot be answered, hey, let’s change it, and declare the substitution “invalid”… how convenient… HAHA!!!
And the shout down is just an icing on the cake: “who are you, you miserable, puny little speck of dirt, to question God?”. If only I had a dollar every time this nonsense was uttered… boy, I would be rich!
D
DPMartin
Guest
He has created the universe as your son understands it, and as he don’t understand it, and all of it moves constantly, therefore all that is made is subject to change, movable. What is not movable is the Truth, His Word, that is of God, for God is the God of Truth.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Your whole arguement rests on this alleged rock existing. You say God might’ve created it for “fun”. But we don’t know he did. If the rock doesn’t exist, the arguement is pointless
The context of the angel Gabriel’s quote was that he was assuring Mary that God could do things human beings would think were impossible. And he can. But I think a better word for this than impossible is absurd.
As for the problem of evil, we were not discussing that and there are several other threads that DO discuss the problem of evil. Let’s stay on topic.
The context of the angel Gabriel’s quote was that he was assuring Mary that God could do things human beings would think were impossible. And he can. But I think a better word for this than impossible is absurd.
As for the problem of evil, we were not discussing that and there are several other threads that DO discuss the problem of evil. Let’s stay on topic.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
No it does not. It rests on the question: “can it exist?”, not “does it exist?”.
You asked why would God do such a thing? I replied that he might do it for fun.
It is not pointless, since it illuminates that the concept of “omnipotence” is meaningless.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Not really. If this rock doesn’t exist, and we have no reason to believe it does, then this is a pointless arguement because God is still omnipotent.
B
buffalo
Guest
Catholics understand God as being almighty.That question is self-contradictory and designed to slowly turn people to Atheism if you don’t notice the flaw and pay close attention.
No finite number is greater than infinity.
- God is everywhere. He is infinite in size (also in strength, power, intelligence, etc.).
- Therefore, it is impossible to create a boulder (which is, by definition, finite in size) that is “too big to move”.
The arguments presented by some people are absurd. If God exists, He would do ____. Well, why would He want to do that? Who are you to decide what God “would” or “should” do? The arrogance… if God doesn’t bow down to their will, they refuse Him.
Omnipotence
Omnipotence is the power of God to effect whatever is not intrinsically impossible. These last words of the definition do not imply any imperfection, since a power that extends to every possibility must be perfect. The universality of the object of the Divine power is not merely relative but absolute, so that the true nature of omnipotence is not clearly expressed by saying that God can do all things that are possible to Him; it requires the further statement that all things are possible to God. The intrinsically impossible is the self-contradictory, and its mutually exclusive elements could result only in nothingness. “Hence,” says Thomas (Summa I, Q. xxv, a. 3), “it is more exact to say that the intrinsically impossible is incapable of production, than to say that God cannot produce it.” To include the contradictory within the range of omnipotence, as does the Calvinist Vorstius, is to acknowledge the absurd as an object of the Divine intellect, and nothingness as an object of the Divine will and power. “God can do all things the accomplishment of which is a manifestation of power,” says Hugh of St. Victor, “and He is almighty because He cannot be powerless” (De sacram., I, ii, 22).
As intrinsically impossible must be classed:
B
Big_Dummy
Guest
Hi Debbie that is a old question. Jesus as God created the universe. As fully man fully God on earth I am sure there were rocks he could not lift. But, by faith one can move mountains. Since the act of creating and the act of moving is two actions, no there is no rock too big or heavy that he can not move.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
That’s not the question. The question is, could God create a rock so big that he could not lift it.
If Yes, God is limited in his omnipotent power and is therefor not all powerful.
If No, God is limited in his omnipotent power and is therefor not all powerful.
J
JohnDamian
Guest
My dear Zatzat,
Omnipotence means Omni Potens, or all things within genus power.
Since creating a logical contradiction is not within the genus power, one can be both omnipotent and unable to make a square triangle, or a rock too large to lift. Philosophy 101.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
Fascinating that God, who apparently lives outside of time and does not need to follow the laws of physics, would be so inclined to have to follow the rules of philosophy 101.My dear Zatzat,
Omnipotence means Omni Potens, or all things within genus power.
Since creating a logical contradiction is not within the genus power, one can be both omnipotent and unable to make a square triangle, or a rock too large to lift. Philosophy 101.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
I think you misunderstand the basis of philosophy.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
I think you misunderstand the power that your God is supposed to possess.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Why would you say that? We just gave a very clear definition of that power.
J
JohnDamian
Guest
Zatzat, when we use words - we use them to communicate.
When I use the word “Omnipotent” in regards to God, I mean that he is/has all things in the Genus of Power.
When I use the word “Omnipotent” I do not extend it to other areas than the genus of Power, for things such as that words like Omniscient etc. come to hand.
It is both misleading and ambiguous to say one thing and mean the other; if I say I believe God to be Omnipotent, the question “can he make a boulder etc.” is not relevant to my claim that God is all things in genus power…
If you could please define where or what word I have, or any other Catholic has, to God that would lead you to the conclusion that God is able to make a logical contradiction (omnicontradictory
??) – if you are unable to find such a word in use by a Catholic, then why would you, or anyone else - insist that this silly “rock/boulder” question is relevant in any way to the nature of God?
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Very good observation. In a communication channel, there is a “sender”, a “message” and a “recipient”. The sender wishes to communicate the message. The recipient will either understand what the sender wanted to express, or not. In the latter case we have miscommunication. The meaning of the message is whatever the recipient “makes” out of it, regardless what the sender intended. If I would send this message to you in a language you do not speak, it would be “garbage” on your side. To be precise: “there is no inherent meaning”.
Well, first of all the concept of “omipotent” (or any other concept) is something that can be (and must be) examined without any reference to God. If you wish to assign that concept as one of God’s attributes, that can be done only as a second step - after the concept has been established in a rational manner and is found to be meaningful. But the definition comes first. What you suggest: “Genus of Power” is just an empty set of words. If you wish to fill them with meaning, please do so. But so far, they mean nothing to me, though I guess, they mean something to you. (By the way, the same observation applies to all of the “omnimax” attributes.)
- Status