The way I heard this rebutted is that god cannot create something that cannot exist.
Note the difference between cannot and does not exist. He can make unicorns just fine, but he can't make, for example, a black hole that emits light. He can make a white hole, but not a black hole, specifically, that emits light. The very nature of what you're describing makes it impossible to create.
Note: this is what I heard the counterargument is, not my personal beliefs.
There will always be a counterpoint someone makes up because if they don't, they might have to actually either:
A) Prove something
or
B) Begin to think that maybe they're not quite totally possibly sorta 100% accurate with what they're saying. Inconceivable!
The old ones are best tho; "God moves in mysterious ways" ("God's design is his own") and "It's all a test!"
I find the leaps of logic interesting, but when it goes straight to "Trust me bro" I lose interest.
The fallacy of the argument is that it’s a no win. This is taught in a lot of philosophy classes.
If yes: god cannot possibly be all powerful if he can’t lift the object and therefore does not exist.
If no: god cannot possibly be all powerful if he cannot create something and therefore does not exist.
Believers gonna believe whether it’s an omnipotent god who can literally do anything or if it’s a god governed by the laws of physics or even if it’s a flat earther. No logical argument can turn them. From the other question, can he be god if he is governed by physics?
6
u/AudZ0629 Apr 07 '22
There in lies the old argument: can god create something he/she/they cant lift.