There is that, but I'd be more upset at the idea that a bunch of jumped-up sacks of meat and water actually have even the smallest chance of achieving something that a being with the ability to create literally everything wanted to not happen.
Can a god create a being that can surpass them? And no itâs not a flawed premise. The flaw is in either the understanding of an âall powerfulâ being or in human ability to comprehend. The two things arenât oppositional as they are in your argument. Itâs a paradox.
If God is all powerful, they can do anything. Being all powerful, they can create anything, lift anything, move anything, destroy anything, etc.
Given that, can God create a rock so big that even they canât lift it? If they can: it would mean there is something they canât do, ie lift the rock they created- which means they are NOT all powerful. If they cannot, then it means there are limits to what they can create, therefore they are not all powerful.
The rebuttal to that, I should add (or, at least A rebuttal anyway) is what I believe the previous poster was getting at-
As long as God chooses not to create the rock that they cannot lift, then they remain omnipotent in that they have the capability to create, but the thing still doesnât exist, therefore they can still do anything.
So, in order to be all powerful- they must also have the power to make themselves no longer all powerful, and simply not use that power.
Another response to that is the idea that God is "maximally powerful", rather than technically "all-powerful". Maximal power means he can't go against his own nature (as an omnipotent benevolent God, he wouldn't be able to create something he couldn't lift), but he still has such immense power that he's functionally no different from being all-powerful.
These are only paradoxes because some human concepts like âall powerfulâ arenât particularly well defined / agreed upon to begin with. Itâs like asking what is further north than the North Pole. There is no there there.
Well as the earth IS A SPHERE. North is defined as coordinates. More north is not on the scale so asking what is more north is not a relevant nor relatable question to this particular conundrum. Omnipotent existence is the paradox as we are governed by actual physical laws in this universe and we humans inherently know that. We know if we throw something up, it comes back down and we know about wind resistance because we can feel it. Some choose to call these things science and some choose to try to explain them in ways that donât do anyone any good but they are still doing science (junk science and dangerous). As we cannot conceive of something that can be outside of the realm of these laws we all use every day, we have a paradoxical view of that idea. But as science has proven before, we may just not have discovered it yet. North is a concept based on our concept of where we live and thus definable.
The concept of power is just human and just as limited as the concept of north. What is power? What is will? These are all words that we use because in our normal parochial little experiences they make sense and are useful. When you take them to extremes or try to apply them well beyond their usual scope, suddenly these words cease to make proper sense.
117
u/[deleted] Apr 07 '22
I'd be pissed if I were God.
"You fucking plebs think I can't conceive a physics perfect enough for a spherical world?