This question may sound clever, but after
careful consideration, it's so deeply
confused that it's hard to make any
sense of it. And I want to tell you why.
I'm Tim Barnett, and today we're applying
some red pen logic to a tweet
from university professor, Mark D'Arcy.
Class is in session.
This is Red Pen Logic with Mr. B where we
assess bad thinking by using good
thinking.
Plus, we try to have a little bit of fun
in the process.
In today's example, molecular biologist
Mark D'Arcy offers a
challenge to the idea of an omnipotent—
that is, all-powerful—
God. The tweet reads: "Can god create a
stone that cannot be lifted? If yes, then
He's not all-powerful
because He cannot lift it. If He cannot
create a stone
that cannot be lifted, then He's not
all-powerful. Either way,
God is not all-powerful. Hashtag humanism. Hashtag
atheism." This atheist, a self-described
advocate of critical thinking,
believes this age-old challenge refutes
God's omnipotence.
Let's see if he's right. Well, it's time
to pull out the red—
wrong pen. Time to pull out the red pen
and take this one from the top.
This challenge puts the believer on the
horns of a dilemma.
Either God cannot create a stone that
cannot be lifted, or
God can't lift a stone that He created.
Either way,
God can't do something. And if He can't
do something, then according to this
atheist,
He's not all-powerful. Therefore, an
all-powerful God
does not exist. Q.E.D. hashtag atheism. Well,
not so fast. I'm thinking that hashtag
might have been a little premature.
This challenge is plagued with problems.
First, it assumes a defective definition
of omnipotence.
Omnipotence does not mean that God can
do anything.
It means God can do anything raw power
can do.
No amount of power, though, can accomplish
something logically impossible.
That qualification is key. D'Arcy may be
surprised to learn that this challenge
was answered
hundreds of years ago. Thomas Aquinas
wrote, "Whatever implies contradiction
does not come within the scope of divine
omnipotence, because it cannot have the
aspect of possibility." In other words, to
say that God can't do something
logically impossible does not limit God
in any way.
Sure, God can't make a married bachelor
or a square circle,
but that's because those words make no
sense.
They're self-contradictory concepts. In
the same way, the question, "Can God create
a stone that cannot be lifted?" Is also
meaningless because it's
self-contradictory. Namely, an omnipotent
God defeating
His own omnipotence. It's asking, "Can God
be omnipotent and not omnipotent
at the same time?" The answer is "no," but
it's not because He's not all-powerful
as the tweet assumes.
It's because the task of an omnipotent
God creating a stone that cannot be lifted
is not really a task at all. It's a
contradictory combination of words.
That's all. A logical absurdity. And if
it's not a task, then it's not
really a problem if God can't do it. By
the way, there are many things that God
can't do
precisely because He's perfect. He can't
lie because He's morally perfect. He
can't cease to exist
because He's the perfection of being. He
can't get His sums wrong
because He's the author of math. And He's
really good at algebra. And He can't do
the logically absurd because He's
perfectly
logical. If the atheist responds, "You've
just redefined omnipotence to escape the
problem. Omnipotence should include the
logically impossible." Well, if that's the
case, then the original challenge just
evaporates. We could just agree that God
can create a stone that He can't lift,
and He can lift it. But if they say,
"That's logically contradictory," we could
simply reply,
"That's right. And on your definition of
omnipotence, God can do the logically
impossible."
So what's the problem? You see, either way,
this challenge does nothing to undermine
God.
So, what have we learned? First,
omnipotence is not the power to do
anything. It's the ability to do anything
that power can do.
Even infinite power cannot do what is
logically contradictory or absurd.
This isn't a limit on God's power. It's a
limit to the kinds of questions we
should be
asking about God's power. Second, it's an
illogical question.
That's because it subtly smuggles in a
contradiction by asking if God's
omnipotence can defeat His omnipotence.
That's like asking, "Can God win in an arm
wrestling match against Himself?"
It's just nonsense. God can make a
bachelor into a married man—
lucky for some of you guys—but He
cannot make a bachelor who
is a married man. Remember, there is no
answer to nonsense questions.
Ironically, in an attempt to show the
incoherence of an omnipotent Creator,
this atheist relies on an incoherent
question. That's not how critical
thinking works.
Class dismissed.
