Omnipotence Paradox

sprtslvr1973

High Elder
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
749
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
47
Location
Atlanta
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox

How would you answer it?
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
34
Omnipotence does not include the absurd or the self-contradictory (like a rock so heavy He can't lift it) since these are things that cannot exist in any possible world and the very "idea" of doing them is a meaningless intellectual hiccup. So God not being able to do them does not mean He isn't omnipotent.
 

NicholasMyra

Merarches
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
8,838
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
hyperdoxherman.tumblr.com
The cop-out answer is that inherent contradictions aren't things, and so they aren't captured in the declaration "...with God all things are possible."

 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
34
NicholasMyra said:
The cop-out answer is that inherent contradictions aren't things, and so they aren't captured in the declaration "...with God all things are possible."
Why would that be a cop-out?
 

Luke

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
7,113
Reaction score
26
Points
48
Orthodoxy teaches that any human language is limited in describing God.
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
34
NicholasMyra said:
Volnutt said:
NicholasMyra said:
The cop-out answer is that inherent contradictions aren't things, and so they aren't captured in the declaration "...with God all things are possible."
Why would that be a cop-out?
Just seems not in the spirit of "things"
It doesn't seem in the spirit of things to me to say that God has "infinity strength" but that a rock can have "infinity+1" weight.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
I suppose if we take into account the incarnation and God's kenosis, he created a great many things he couldn't lift.
 

Antonis

Archon
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
2,996
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Iconodule said:
I suppose if we take into account the incarnation and God's kenosis, he created a great many things he couldn't lift.
Sounds like a fourth desert temptation.
 

Opus118

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
3,977
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Age
69
Location
Oceanside, California
God creates rock that He cannot move or lift.
God wants to use the rock for other purposes, rather than just sitting around.
God moves the universe, keeping the rock in the same place.
Rock falls into a black hole.
Rock no longer exists.
 

RaphaCam

Patriarch of Trashposting
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
8,607
Reaction score
50
Points
48
Age
23
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Website
em-espirito-e-em-verdade.blogspot.com
This is just linguistic rather than a theological problem.

Opus118 said:
God creates rock that He cannot move or lift.
God wants to use the rock for other purposes, rather than just sitting around.
God moves the universe, keeping the rock in the same place.
Rock falls into a black hole.
Rock no longer exists.
OK, this is good too. You should be his intern.  ;D
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
34
Iconodule said:
I suppose if we take into account the incarnation and God's kenosis, he created a great many things he couldn't lift.
I didn't think that was the Orthodox view of kenosis. Jesus was still capable of doing anything while He was on earth, He just chose not to a good many things, including going along with some of our "blameless passion" human limitations like physical weakness.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
Volnutt said:
Iconodule said:
I suppose if we take into account the incarnation and God's kenosis, he created a great many things he couldn't lift.
I didn't think that was the Orthodox view of kenosis. Jesus was still capable of doing anything while He was on earth, He just chose not to a good many things, including going along with some of our "blameless passion" human limitations like physical weakness.
That's certainly the view of many orthodox fathers. Is it the orthodox view? Fr Sergius Bulkagov discusses this in his The Lamb of God and alleges that it is quasi-docetic, and I think he has a point. It is one thing for God to voluntarily empty himself and assume a human nature with all the limitations and weaknesses thereof, and another to be switching this humanity on and off at appropriate moments, weeping here to show that he is human, praying there to give an example to the disciples, etc. What do you think?
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
34
Iconodule said:
Volnutt said:
Iconodule said:
I suppose if we take into account the incarnation and God's kenosis, he created a great many things he couldn't lift.
I didn't think that was the Orthodox view of kenosis. Jesus was still capable of doing anything while He was on earth, He just chose not to a good many things, including going along with some of our "blameless passion" human limitations like physical weakness.
That's certainly the view of many orthodox fathers. Is it the orthodox view? Fr Sergius Bulkagov discusses this in his The Lamb of God and alleges that it is quasi-docetic, and I think he has a point. It is one thing for God to voluntarily empty himself and assume a human nature with all the limitations and weaknesses thereof, and another to be switching this humanity on and off at appropriate moments, weeping here to show that he is human, praying there to give an example to the disciples, etc. What do you think?
I think I sympathize with both sides. I'm afraid that making Jesus completely like fallen us and completely without control edges into some form of quasi-adoptionism in which Christ on earth is not really God and only "takes His deity back" at the Resurrection.

But I agree that there's an opposite extreme that does kind of edge into Julianism, at least, if not docetism. I'm not at all sure where to draw the line.
 
Top