Can God create a God more powerful than him?

[ericc]

So can God for exp. create another god, in another universe to rule that is independant from the original god’s existence, it may be like a father creating a son and making sure that his son would be powerful even more powerful than him and also independent.

There is no necessity because He is everywhere. Even in the OTHER universe. He is UNCHANGING so you get the same deal everywhere.

 

[Gorgias]

This is how I see it:

If he can’t that means he isn’t all powerful.
If he can that means he is all powerful.

But once willing to do so he wouldn’t remain the most powerful but he would still be all powerful, untill the secondary God uses his extra powers to decrease the original God’s power.
So if the answer was no, that means he isn’t all powerful.
If the answer was yes, that means he is all powerful, until he puts that will into action. But maybe some other thing to consider would be the time.

You’re very close to being correct here.

If there is a god (created by God) who is more powerful than God, then there isn’t the need for the created god to “put will into action.” In terms of the created god’s nature, he is already not subject to the power of God.

But, if we correct your analysis, we run into a problem… you devolve into paradox: if God cannot, he isn’t all powerful. If God can, He isn’t all powerful. Yet, how can a non-omnipotent God create omnipotence? Paradox.

The problem is, you have other issues: how can a god who must be created be all-powerful? That is, he is not the cause of his existence, and therefore, because there is a god who is the cause of his existence, there’s a god who has a power that he doesn’t. Paradox.

But wait… there’s more. What makes God ‘god’ is his unchanging perfection. If there’s the possibility that there could be a more perfect being than God, then He’s not god to begin with. So, if He could do so, then that implies that he was never god to begin with, and therefore… paradox.

So, since your thought experiment leads to paradox on all counts, we have to ask why you’ve painted yourself into this corner to begin with. The solution is simple: you’re asking for a logical impossibility. So, this has nothing to do with God and His power; rather, you’ve asked a question that is logically impossible from the very begin. This is a logically untenable question.

 

[tonyrey]

You’re very close to being correct here.

If there is a god (created by God) who is more powerful than God, then there isn’t the need for the created god to “put will into action.” In terms of the created god’s nature, he is already not subject to the power of God.

But, if we correct your analysis, we run into a problem… you devolve into paradox: if God cannot, he isn’t all powerful. If God can, He isn’t all powerful. Yet, how can a non-omnipotent God create omnipotence? Paradox.

The problem is, you have other issues: how can a god who must be created be all-powerful? That is, he is not the cause of his existence, and therefore, because there is a god who is the cause of his existence, there’s a god who has a power that he doesn’t. Paradox.

But wait… there’s more. What makes God ‘god’ is his unchanging perfection. If there’s the possibility that there could be a more perfect being than God, then He’s not god to begin with. So, if He could do so, then that implies that he was never god to begin with, and therefore… paradox.

So, since your thought experiment leads to paradox on all counts, we have to ask why you’ve painted yourself into this corner to begin with. The solution is simple: you’re asking for a logical impossibility. So, this has nothing to do with God and His power; rather, you’ve asked a question that is logically impossible from the very begin. This is a logically untenable question.

An excellent reductio ad absurdum!

 

[ANV]

You’re very close to being correct here.

If there is a god (created by God) who is more powerful than God, then there isn’t the need for the created god to “put will into action.” In terms of the created god’s nature, he is already not subject to the power of God.

But, if we correct your analysis, we run into a problem… you devolve into paradox: if God cannot, he isn’t all powerful. If God can, He isn’t all powerful. Yet, how can a non-omnipotent God create omnipotence? Paradox.

The problem is, you have other issues: how can a god who must be created be all-powerful? That is, he is not the cause of his existence, and therefore, because there is a god who is the cause of his existence, there’s a god who has a power that he doesn’t. Paradox.

But wait… there’s more. What makes God ‘god’ is his unchanging perfection. If there’s the possibility that there could be a more perfect being than God, then He’s not god to begin with. So, if He could do so, then that implies that he was never god to begin with, and therefore… paradox.

So, since your thought experiment leads to paradox on all counts, we have to ask why you’ve painted yourself into this corner to begin with. The solution is simple: you’re asking for a logical impossibility. So, this has nothing to do with God and His power; rather, you’ve asked a question that is logically impossible from the very begin. This is a logically untenable question.

So I should have said a being instead of God in that case, since you are refering to a God as a first cause and creator, this wouldn’t change much the logic of the question, since it is represented by whether God can make something more powerful than him, regardless of being first cause or not.

 

[ANV]

An excellent reductio ad absurdum!

Kalam cosmological argument itself is reductio ad absurdum, because it’s based only on an assumption, also it says that everything should have a cause but excludes God from the equation for no good reason.

 

[e_c]

So I should have said a being instead of God in that case, since you are refering to a God as a first cause and creator, this wouldn’t change much the logic of the question, since it is represented by whether God can make something more powerful than him, regardless of being first cause or not.

The object of power is that which is possible. For God, all things which are conceptually possible to do (not violating the Principle of Non-Contradiction) are also really possible to do. What you are asking about is term whose parts contradict themselves, much like the old canard about a rock so heavy God can’t lift it… Well, a rock like that would have to be infinite in weight, but weight is a quantity, and quantity is not infinite.

It may help to point out that, once we get into these discussions, language ought to become more and more precise. We do not really speak of God as “a being,” strictly speaking. God is rather being itself subsisting… “Existence” as distinct from what participates in existence. Speaking about God as “the biggest kid on the block” is going to lead to these kinds of conundrums about omnipotence, among other problems.

 

[STT]

He cannot. He is max in all possible attributes.

 

[ANV]

He cannot. He is max in all possible attributes.

How is that, why would not an all powerful God create something more powerful than him, do you mean that his all powerful qualities has it’s limits, how so, can you explain?

 

[ANV]

The object of power is that which is possible. For God, all things which are conceptually possible to do (not violating the Principle of Non-Contradiction) are also really possible to do. What you are asking about is term whose parts contradict themselves, much like the old canard about a rock so heavy God can’t lift it… Well, a rock like that would have to be infinite in weight, but weight is a quantity, and quantity is not infinite.

It may help to point out that, once we get into these discussions, language ought to become more and more precise. We do not really speak of God as “a being,” strictly speaking. God is rather being itself subsisting… “Existence” as distinct from what participates in existence. Speaking about God as “the biggest kid on the block” is going to lead to these kinds of conundrums about omnipotence, among other problems.

So because God’s power is infinite it would be illogical to create something more powerful than his infinite power, is that what you mean?
That would look logical from that point.

 

[STT]

How is that, why would not an all powerful God create something more powerful than him, do you mean that his all powerful qualities has it’s limits, how so, can you explain?

Suppose that God is 100 out of 100 in one attribute. He wouldn’t be God if He is 99. He cannot be higher than 100, 101 for example because 100 is max. Therefore He cannot create a being who is more powerful than him, 101 for example, since 100 is max.

 

[Wesrock]

So I should have said a being instead of God in that case, since you are refering to a God as a first cause and creator, this wouldn’t change much the logic of the question, since it is represented by whether God can make something more powerful than him, regardless of being first cause or not.

You’re still missing/ignoring most of the steps and conclusions of these arguments which have been carefully outlined.

 

[IWantGod]

So because God’s power is infinite it would be illogical to create something more powerful than his infinite power, is that what you mean?
That would look logical from that point.

That’s exactly what is being argued.

 

[ANV]

That’s exactly what is being argued.

Yes, from that point it would be logical to consider but not from the point of being a creator or the first cause.

 

[e_c]

So because God’s power is infinite it would be illogical to create something more powerful than his infinite power, is that what you mean?
That would look logical from that point.

Right. It would be like asking if we could make the North Pole be more northward. It would also be like asking if we can give more than we have.

 

[ANV]

Right. It would be like asking if we could make the North Pole be more northward. It would also be like asking if we can give more than we have.

True, that makes sense, a being with infinite power can’t logically create a being more powerful than him because he already won’t be having any limit for his power, but not sure about that physically though it is logical.

 

[tonyrey]

Kalam cosmological argument itself is reductio ad absurdum, because it’s based only on an assumption, also it says that everything should have a cause but excludes God from the equation for no good reason.

It is based on the principle of causality without which science would be worthless!

There is a very good reason, i.e. an infinite regress of causes is both illogical and gratuitous because it violates the principle of causality and there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. It is an evasion not an explanation!

NB There may be uncaused events at the microscopic level but they still presuppose the existence of the universe which is **as far as we know **a unique phenomenon. There may well be other universes but that hypothesis would still encounter the problem of their origin

 

[Gorgias]

So I should have said a being instead of God in that case

You’re asking “can a god who may or may not be the first cause create a god (who is definitely not the first cause) more powerful than himself?”

That’s a non-starter: a god who is not the first cause is not a god. This ‘god’, by definition, is a creature, not a god.