Omnipotence Paradox

The omnipotence paradox is a family of paradoxes that arise with some understandings of the term omnipotent. The paradox arises, for example, if one assumes that an omnipotent being has no limits and is capable of realizing any outcome, even logically contradictory ideas such as creating square circles. A no-limit understanding of omnipotence such as this has been rejected by theologians from St Thomas Aquinas to contemporary philosophers of religion, such as Alvin Platinga. Atheological arguments based on omnipotence paradox are sometimes described as evidence for atheism, though Christian theologians and philosophers, such as Norman Geisler and William Lane Craig, contend that a no-limits understanding of omnipotence is not relevant to orthodox Christian theology. Other resolutions to the paradox hinge on the definition of omnipotence applied and the nature of God regarding this application and whether omnipotence is directed towards God himself or outward toward his external surroundings.

The omnipotence paradox has midieval origins, dating at least to the 12th century. It was addressed by Averroës, and later by St Thomas Aquinas. Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (before 532 AD) has a predecessor version of the paradox, asking whether it is possible for God to "deny himself."

The most well-known version of the omnipotence paradox is the paradox of the stone: "Could God create a stone so heavy that even he could not lift it?" This phrasing of the omnipotence paradox is vulnerable to objections based on the physical nature of gravity, such as how the weight of an object depends on what the local gravitational field is. Alternative statements of the paradox that do not involve such difficulties include: "If given the axioms of Euclidean geometry, can an omnipotent being create a triangle whose angles do not add up to 180 degrees?" and "Can God create a prison so secure that he cannot escape from it himself?"

x----x

Picture from Pixabay.

Comments

How to Create a Richly Imagined World

For someone who likes fantasy and sci-fi fiction, most of the time, a lot of people ask me about how to create a richly imagined world. Fantasy and sci-fi elements rest heavily on how an author weave the setting and the world in which the heroes dwell in, and it helps to make the novel to be imagined vividly in the readers' minds. A convincing world should be relatable, something that we can associate ourselves with. For us to be associated with a world an author created in his mind, and wrote on the pages of a book, this world has to be close to the real thing. It has to be systematic, real and alive, and very convincing. A real world has certain elements, and an author must consider them in writing a vividly imagined world: Cartography - a fantasy or sci-fi world depend heavily on geography and maps, especially if the plot requires war and the belligerents occupy so much space in the plot. A convincing world has the world separated in territories, and every part of the...

The Roman Empire

The Roman Empire was the post-Rupublican period of ancient Rome. As a polity it included large territorial holdings around the Mediterranean Sea in Europe, Northern Africa, and Western Asia ruled by emperors. From the accession of Caesar Augustus to the military anarchy of the third century, it was a principate with Italy as metropole of the provinces and the city of Rome as sole capital (27 BC - 286 AD). After the military crisis, the empire was ruled by military emperors who shared rule over the Western Roman Empire (based in Milan and later in Ravenna) and over the Eastern Roman Empire (also known as the Byzantine Empire; centered on Nicomedia and Antioch, later based in Constantinopole). Rome remained the nominal capital of both parts until 476 AD, when the imperial insignia were sent to Constantinopole, following the capture of Ravenna by the barbarians of Odoacer and the subsequent deposition of Romulus Augustulus. The fall of the Western Roman Empire to Germanic Kings, alon...

Theodicy

Theodicy means vindication of God. It is to answer the question why a good God permits the manifestation of evil, thus resolving the issue of the problem of evil. Some theodicies also address the evidential problem of evil by attempting "to make the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good or omnibenevolent God consistent with the existence of evil or suffering in this world." Unlike a defense, which tries to demonstrate that God's existence is logically possible in the light of evil, a theodicy attempts to provide a framework where God's existence is also plausible. The German philosopher and mathematician Gottfried Leibniz coined the term "theodicy" in 1710 in his work Théodecée, through various responses to the problem of evil that had been previously proposed. The British philosopher John Hick traced the history of moral theodicy in his 1966 work, Evil and the Love of God, identifying three major traditions: the Plotinian theodicy, named a...

Search This Blog