tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post1218204177347384782..comments2023-09-16T03:11:06.126-07:00Comments on Philosophies of Men Mingled With Scripture: The Omnipotence ParadoxCristofer Urlaubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04001401371451376407noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-3985361717457992202012-01-18T12:23:49.684-08:002012-01-18T12:23:49.684-08:00Don't apologize. It's a great comment, and...Don't apologize. It's a great comment, and I agree. I think God is bound by the good, but it's a loose binding since He only wishes to do good anyways. It's not a binding He ever has need to tug against.Cristofer Urlaubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001401371451376407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-40529178285266487512012-01-18T11:48:17.356-08:002012-01-18T11:48:17.356-08:00I think that sometimes when we are considering the...I think that sometimes when we are considering the omnipotence of God we focus too much on what He can or can't do, when it is possible that His omnipotence has as much to do with what He will or will not do. God isn't bound by time or space, but I believe it isn't incorrect to say that he is bound by morality and goodness. When the scriptures say God can't lie, it is equally true that God won't lie. He not only has control over the universe, but has control over His own self. Regarding the rock, perhaps the correct answer is: God can't create a rock so big that He can't lift it because He won't do such a thing. There would be no reason for Him to do that, it has no good purpose, so He won't do it. An example of this is when Satan was tempting Jesus Christ to turn rocks into bread to satisfy his hunger after fasting. Jesus refused. Why? Not because he couldn't do it, but because he wouldn't. To do so would have been selfish and an unnecessary use of his power. Jesus didn't need to prove anything, just like God doesn't need to prove how great He is by creating a rock so big He can't lift it, and then lift it. In closing, I believe that God is is God not only because of what He can do but also because of what He will and will not do. I apologize for how repetitive my comment may sound.Ang Pogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04123178516942849297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-17100700155211004292010-12-29T14:44:41.375-08:002010-12-29T14:44:41.375-08:00Well, you admit that God "must" be infin...Well, you admit that God "must" be infinitely and eternally good, and you claim that God "can't" think of something as right now and wrong later. So it sounds like we're talking about the same thing, but we're talking about it differently. <br /><br />As far as the Lord unusual commands, I started to prepare a list, but it got really long, so I'm hoping I can just email it to you or something. I don't want to post a comment long enough to be a separate post, but I do want to answer your question.<br /><br />In the meantime, this verse at least proves my point, Matt 12:11, that it is sometimes acceptable to break a commandment, even the super sacred sabbath, if a greater good is at stake. The Law of Charity takes precedence over every ritual law.Cristofer Urlaubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001401371451376407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-43162690727773295162010-12-29T06:56:16.281-08:002010-12-29T06:56:16.281-08:00To say God is "bound" by anything seems ...To say God is "bound" by anything seems flawed logic. If we are talking about the Christian God, one of the attributes He possesses is infinity. He is infinite and eternal, so limitless in both time and space. However, if He is infinite, than this attribute must extend to His other attributes as well. He can't be infinite, except when it comes to omnipotence. So He must be infinitely and eternally omnipotent, which means under no circumstances is God "bound" by anything. <br /><br />However, this also applies to God's goodness, so God must be infinitely and eternally good. Situations don't apply to God because God isn't limited by time and therefore doesn't see situations as different from one another. He sees the whole thing as one big picture. God can't think one thing is right at one time and wrong at another time, because He isn't bound by time and situations in the way we are. If something is good, it is eternally good, as it applies to God. <br /><br />Since you said God has told people to break pretty much all of the Ten Commandments, where you get this from. I haven't seen it anywhere in my Bible.Hubbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10957352801073584349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-25331427787409819732010-12-26T01:46:28.397-08:002010-12-26T01:46:28.397-08:00Thank you very much for your comment!
I think you...Thank you very much for your comment!<br /><br />I think your point #2 answers our disagreement. God is indeed contingent on something, the "good". God cannot be evil. <br /><br />You say, "...who or what decides when He is or isn't? If it's Himself, then His omnipotence isn't really contingent... If it's someone or something else (the setting, etc.), then He's just not omnipotent."<br /><br />I think I'd say that he is omnipotent, but not in the way that we define it today. He's bound by the "good", which it just so happens he pretty much personifies. So it is still the case that he can do anything He wills, since it is always "good".Cristofer Urlaubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001401371451376407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-1932997129501652010-12-25T22:17:43.483-08:002010-12-25T22:17:43.483-08:00Laughing Ninja,
I'm in partial agreement:
(1)...Laughing Ninja,<br /><br />I'm in partial agreement:<br />(1) All potential forms of omnipotence are bound by specific and intrinsic logical limitations: four-side triangles and married bachelors are great examples (which I wish I could have come up with when I wrote my post). This is true of both the Christian God, and any other potential theory of omnipotence you could imagine. To say, "my imagined Deity can make four-sided triangles" is to say absolutely nothing.<br /><br />(2) Beyond the intrinsic logical limitations, there are also the limits which we know the Christian God to have, on the basis of His Being.* Chief amongst these are the Goodness of God. God cannot (either intrinsically, or by virtue of His Will) do something evil. So when Christians speak of God's omnipotence, we mean that anything God wills, He can do. But since He cannot <i>will</i> evil (since evil is, by definition, that which is contrary to the will of God), things like lying aren't on that list.<br /><br />Beyond this, however, I'm afraid we disagree (provided I'm understanding your argument):<br /><br />Your argument makes God's omnipotence situational, and thus, contingent. Sometimes He can lift a rock, sometimes He can't. But God is, by definition, not contingent. St. Thomas Aquinas proves this in the third of the <i>Quinque viae</i>. <br /><br />The universe exists, but it could have not existed. Its existence isn't logically necessary, and since it's a created thing, it is by definition contingent, since it's conditioned upon the actions of Another, God. But God can't, in turn, be contingent -- or at least, there has to be a non-contingent First Cause. In the view you've painted, sometimes God is omnipotent, and sometimes He isn't. But who or what decides when He is or isn't? If it's Himself, then His omnipotence isn't really contingent. If it's someone or something else (the setting, etc.), then He's just not omnipotent. <br /><br />Hope that made sense -- apologies in advance if it didn't. Merry Christmas! (And to you, too, Roderick!).<br /><br /><br />* Euthyphro's dilemma is somewhat implicated in the question of whether God chooses to be bound by His own Goodness -- whether God's Goodness is a <i>product</i> of His Will, or an immutable <i>boundary</i> to it. At the very least, we can say that God would not be God were He to violate His own perfect Will, and God willing what He does not will runs afoul of the logical limitations of (1), anyways.Joe Heschmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-10515339623975934242010-12-25T08:40:26.049-08:002010-12-25T08:40:26.049-08:00Yes I am. Your Welcome. :)Yes I am. Your Welcome. :)Cristofer Urlaubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001401371451376407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1482258322937378632.post-9226131321292379652010-12-25T07:05:05.268-08:002010-12-25T07:05:05.268-08:00Are you a Mormon? ThanksAre you a Mormon? ThanksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com