7 Answers

  1. A question based on incorrect or mutually exclusive premises is called sophism. Accordingly, the resulting paradox does not need to be refuted, since it does not prove anything about God, except for the possibility of formulating a sophism.

    By the way, your question can also be called sophistic, since it is based on the incorrect premise that believers refute this paradox in some special way.

    In reality, the laws of logic are the same for everyone, both believers and non-believers. This is not a question of a creed, but of a culture of thought.

  2. I won't give you an answer. I will only say that for religion, paradoxes are needed like air. Without paradoxes, religion is a gray routine. For example, one of the paradoxes of Christianity: man is more powerful than God. Because God is a good without options. Just like angels: either absolute good or absolute evil. Man is the only person in the universe who has the freedom of choice. Now look at this personification of freedom: a grain of sand that depends on the whim of viruses.

  3. In different ways, paradoxes are generally a very subjective thing: they seem paradoxes only with a certain view and approach – and for flexible thinking it is easy to see a way out of them, because the contradiction does not arise by itself, but only in relation to subjective prerequisites and conditions.

    The situation itself has many uncertainties and unknowns: what is good and evil? and what is omnipotence? Does God rule the world? Does God want something? and is it adequate to judge all this with a human mind? – a paradox will arise only for those who want to get into a paradox, and those who want to understand how it is-let them understand, step with their minds beyond the boundaries of school logic.

    In philosophy, the solution to this problem is also known. The key point here is the difference between the real and the possible.

  4. It seems to me that this is not a paradox of religion and God's omnipotence, but of language and logic. Paradoxes indicate the imperfection of human thinking. If we could think perfectly like God, we would solve this paradox.

    Any paradox cannot be solved within the logic of the paradox itself. To do this, you need to go to a higher, general system of language, loqiga, and thinking.

    So the mathematicianKurt Friedrich Godel proved the incompleteness theorem:

    The logical completeness (or incompleteness) of any axiom system cannot be proved within the framework of this system. Additional axioms are required to prove or refute it.

    Therefore, to solve the omnipotence paradox, we need to go beyond the human consciousness that gave rise to this paradox.

    For example:

    For example, the liar's paradox. If a Cretan says that all Cretans are liars, then this is a paradox, we cannot tell whether he is telling the truth or a lie – the truth of the axiom system is not provable within itself. But an Athenian who always tells the truth can claim that all Cretans are liars – we have proved the truth of one set of axioms from another.

  5. The fact that we are very happy that you read about the problem of theodicy in Wikipedia yesterday.

    God doesn't have to fit into human-made categories. Human-made models don't always work perfectly even in the material world, let alone in the higher spiritual worlds.

    What folly!

    How can you count a potter as clay?

    Will the product tell you who made it:

    “he didn't make me”?

    and will the work tell its own story about the artist:

    “he does not understand”?

    Isaiah 29: 16

    Woe to him who disputes with his Creator,

    a potsherd of earth's potsherds!

    Will the clay say to the potter, ” What are you doing?”

    and it's up to you whether it will tell about you: “he doesn't have hands?”

    Isaiah 45: 9

    So I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he was working his work on the wheel. And the vessel which the potter had made of clay fell to pieces in his hand; and he made of it again another vessel, as it pleased the potter to make.

    Jeremiah 18: 3-4

    This image is repeated many times in the Bible.

  6. God is not omnipotent. He knows how to do only good and always acts wisely. Therefore, God does not know how to do evil and stupid things like creating stones to raise them.

  7. Well, here everyone has it individually.

    • true believers believe that God is known by the heart and faith, and logical riddles do not touch religion in any way, and there is no point in refuting him

    • savvy believers also add that the omnipotence paradox criticizes the peculiarities of human thinking and even the human diet, which cannot answer even a simple question about God and the stone for itself, but tries to find out the truths of the Universe. And they also do not see the point of refuting the pseudo-question ” Can God break his own laws-so that twice two is not 4?”

    • Humorous people respond with paradoxes to paradoxes. There, like, God creates a man and he lifts a stone. And, on the one hand, God both lifted the stone (with the hands of man) and did not lift it (he did not lift it himself), and the discussion eventually flows into a dispute about what God is, what he is and what he is not, etc.

Leave a Reply