Tough questions about Evil

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Utilitarianism

One problems that I have with utilitarianism is that it leads to an "end justifies the means" mentality. If any worthwhile end can justify the means to attain it, a true ethical foundation is lost. But we all know that the end does not justify the means. If that were so, then Hitler could justify the Holocaust because the end was to purify the human race.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So can God create a rock so heavy he can't lift it? Can God forget, whilst still being omniscient?

Your question has as much sense as the following one:

Can a triangle have four sides and a square be round?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Your question has as much sense as the following one:

Can a triangle have four sides and a square be round?

So God isn't omnipotent then. Thanks for clearing that up. I'll let you get back to your limited God.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So God isn't omnipotent then. Thanks for clearing that up. I'll let you get back to your limited God.

So God isn't omnipotent then.

How did you make that jump?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So God isn't omnipotent then. Thanks for clearing that up. I'll let you get back to your limited God.

God is supposed to be omnipotent. If He is omnipotent, then He can create a rock so big that He can't pick it up. If He cannot make a rock like this, then He is not omnipotent. If He can make a rock so big He can't pick it up, then He isn't omnipotent either. Either way demonstrates that God cannot do something. Therefore God is not omnipotent. Therefore God does not exist.

Is this your line of reasoning?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So can God create a rock so heavy he can't lift it? Can God forget, whilst still being omniscient?

The problem is that this bit of logic omits some crucial information, therefore, it's conclusion is inaccurate.

What the above "paradox" lacks is vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of His nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does anything and everything else.

For example, I have human nature. I can run. But, I cannot outrun a lion. My nature simply does not permit it. My ability to run is connected to my nature and I cannot violate it. So too with God. His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence, then, must be consistent with what He is and not with what He is not since His omnipotence is not an entity to itself. Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all powerful. Also, He cannot cease to be God. Since He is in all places at all times, if He stopped existing then He wouldn't be in all places at all time. Therefore, He cannot cease to exist without violating His own nature.

The point is that God cannot do something that is a violation of His own existence and nature. Therefore, He cannot make a rock so big he can't pick up, or make something bigger than Himself, etc. But, not being able to do this does not mean He is not God nor that He is not omnipotent. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything consistent with His nature and consistent with His desire within the realm of His unlimited and universal power which we do not possess. This does not mean He can violate His own nature. If He did something inconsistent with His nature, then He would be self contradictory. If God were self contradictory, He would not be true. Likewise, if He did something that violated his nature, like make a rock so big He can't pick it up, He would also not be true since that would be a self contradiction. Since truth is not self contradictory, as neither is God, if He were not true, then He would not be God. But God is true and not self contradictory, therefore, God cannot do something that violates His own nature.

Another way to look at it is realize that in order for God to make something so big He couldn't pick it up, He would have to make a rock bigger than Himself. Since He is infinite in size, He would have to make something that would be bigger than Himself. Since it is His nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, He cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than He.

Also, since a rock, by definition, is not infinitely big, then it isn't logically possible to make a rock, something that is finite in size, be infinite in size (no longer a rock) since only God is infinite in size. At dictionary.com, a rock is defined as a "Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone. a) A relatively small piece or fragment of such material. b) A relatively large body of such material, as a cliff or peak. c) A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant part of the earth's crust." A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that the rock must be so big that God cannot pick it up is to say that the rock is no longer a rock.

What the critics are asking is that God become self contradictory as a proof He doesn't exist. Their assertion is illogical from the start. So what they are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. They want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid.

http://www.carm.org/questions/rock.htm

Originally posted by kirksey957
What's your take on the Book of Job?

What part of it, it is a large book? A good read is my impression.
Kelly

Originally posted by dj2becker
The problem is that this bit of logic omits some crucial information, therefore, it's conclusion is inaccurate.

What the above "paradox" lacks is vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of His nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does ...[text shortened]... aradox" is self-refuting and invalid.

http://www.carm.org/questions/rock.htm

Weeeeeell. I guess I'm omnipotent too, since I can do everything that is within my nature to do, same as your concept of God. I didn't think it was so easy to be omnipotent. My self-confidence is certainly up, though.

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
Weeeeeell. I guess I'm omnipotent too, since I can do everything that is within my nature to do, same as your concept of God. I didn't think it was so easy to be omnipotent. My self-confidence is certainly up, though.

I think it is important to realise that God is not omnipotent because he can do everything that is within his nature. Unlike yourself, His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence, then, must be consistent with what He is and not with what He is not since His omnipotence is not an entity to itself.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all powerful.

Yes, it does mean that he's not all-powerful. Perhaps the author of that website should study logic a bit more closely.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Yes, it [b]does mean that he's not all-powerful. Perhaps the author of that website should study logic a bit more closely.[/b]

What you are saying is that a triangle does not have four corners, therefore it is not a triangle!

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
Weeeeeell. I guess I'm omnipotent too, since I can do everything that is within my nature to do, same as your concept of God. I didn't think it was so easy to be omnipotent. My self-confidence is certainly up, though.

Before you boost up your self-confidence too much, heres 2 fallacies you are committing in your argument:

1) You are comparing the finite with the infinite, the natural with the supernatural.
2) You are saying that because I have the potential to do anything in your nature you therefore automatically have the ability to do anything.

Let me explain:

First of all, we can't all be the strongest man in the world; we can't all be the wisest man in the world, the fastest runner in the world (etc.). You aren't "omnipotent" in the limited sense of your humanity, otherwise you would be those types of men listed above, all combined into one. Also, just because we are the strongest or wisest or fastest in the world doesn't even mean we have reached our full potential. And even if you think you have reached your full potential, how do you accurately compare yourself to another?

Here's where God comes in. We can only be so strong and wise and fast accordinig to our finite being, which is further constricted by our own potential. However, God is infinite; He has no bounds to his strength, wisdom, or speed. He has no potential, because He is has already achieved it. And He can't be compared to anyone accurately because He is so superior to our finite beings.

Let's furthermore look at the question raised: "Can God create a rock to big for Him to carry?"

First of all, I am very hesitant in answering these type of questions, because what I have come across, the poser of the question has already made up his mind about what he thinks is the answer. He has already come to his conclusion before all the evidence is presented and will not budge in his resolve.

Secondly, we are forgetting the fact that God is perfect (or at least that is what Christians belileve according to the Bible). He is omnipotent in the sense that He can do anything good He wants to. This therefore eliminates the possibility of Him committing a sin. This eliminates the possibility of Him contradicting His nature. This eliminates the possibility of Him being illogical. One fellow poster compared it to a triangle having 4 sides; if it did it would simply not be a triangle anymore. The same logic applies, if God did, He would simply not be God anymore, which is something He can't do.

Thirdly, because God is infinite, He would have to make the rock bigger than infinite. This is impossible in two ways. First, nothing can be bigger than infinite. Second, you cannot have two things infinitely big, because they would collide, overlap, etc, and God cannot compromise His nature, as stated above, in having this infinite rock oosing into and taking the place of His being of infinity.

Fourthly, the poser of that question speculates about something that he can't prove. In something that has already been established, as in the Bible, Christians hold that as the highest authority. From our perspective, the burden of proof is on you to give more reasoning that just simply stating a question. Give us more to work with, because we already think we can prove you are wrong, as presented above. We can speculate about something we can prove. You should not speculate on something you can't prove. Yes, speculation in the literal sense is to pose questions for debate, but if you have nothing to offer in the debate, then be silent.

So when look at that original question, it is the same as asking "Can God sin?" or "Can a triangle have four sides?" or "Can a bachelor be married?" To summarize, the fallacy of "Can God create a rock too big for Him to lift?" is that you are putting God in a box, labeling and giving Him a definition, in which, by your predetermined and presupposional views, you are making it impossible for others to contend and/or beat you on the grounds you have set.

I'm finished now. Please present a logical defense, if you have one.

Originally posted by dj2becker
What you are saying is that a triangle does not have four corners, therefore it is not a triangle!

Not even close.

I'm rejecting your (website's) definition of 'omnipotent', given that it does not include the ability to do simple things like tell a lie.

Originally posted by ngeisler88
Secondly, we are forgetting the fact that God is perfect (or at least that is what Christians belileve according to the Bible). He is omnipotent in the sense that He can do anything good He wants to. This therefore eliminates the possibility of Him committing a sin.

Sorry, but this means I possess an ability that God lacks. It's hard to think of a being as omnipotent when I can do something that he can't.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Sorry, but this means I possess an ability that God lacks. It's hard to think of a being as omnipotent when I can do something that he can't.

Absurdites notwithstanding, you are completely missing the intent of the phrase.