The Instigator
TheNextDaVinci
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ssadi
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Can an all powerful, unlimited God (Christian ) create a stone he can't lift?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
ssadi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 327 times Debate No: 87607
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

TheNextDaVinci

Con

If God can't create a stone he can't lift, then he is limited to not being able to create that stone, but if he can, then he is limited to lifting the stone.
ssadi

Pro

ACCEPTED.


I would like to thank the instigator for this interesting debate.



INTRODUCTION


Unlimited: infinite, boundless.


This is a famous argument against omnipotence of God, called as "Stone Paradox".[1] It can be simply summarized by what Con posted in round 1.


Con: "If God can't create a stone he can't lift, then he is limited to not being able to create that stone, but if he can, then he is limited to lifting the stone."


Note 1

The question of this debate is not about whether God can create such a stone or not, so that Pro argued that he can and Con argued that he can't. But it is about no matter what Pro will say, yes or no, it would be against the omnipotence of God, Con argues.


Note 2

Therefore, the proper resolution of this debate should be whether the stone paradox is against the omnipotence of God or not.



RESOLUTION & BOP


Does stone paradox refute God's omnipotence?


BOP is shared!

Con argues that the omnipotence paradox refutes the omnipotence of God.
Pro argues that the omnipotence paradox does not refute the omnipotence of God.


Note 3

Pro will not argue that this paradox is in favor of omnipotence of God, since it is obviously not, but will only argue that it is not against omnipotence of God.



I. OMNIPOTENCE PARADOX DOESN'T REFUTE GOD'S OMNIPOTENCE


Please note that the stone paradox is an example of omnipotence paradox (omnipotence paradox is more general where stone paradox can be considered as an example to omnipotence paradox). Let me formalize the stone paradox into a more general form as follows.

Can an Omnipotent God create a task so difficult that he cannot perform?

i) If yes, then his power is limited by difficulty of performing this task.

ii) If no, then his power is limited by creating such a task.

Let me now show how it doesn’t refute omnipotence of God.

An Omnipotent God means that He is INFINITELY powerful or His power is BOUNDLESS.


Saying that “a task is so difficult that an INFINITELY powerful God cannot perform it” means that the difficulty of that task is greater than infinity. This doesn’t make sense, because nothing can be greater than infinity.


Mathematically speaking, can something be greater than something unlimited? No, because by definition, nothing can be greater than something unlimited in greatness (power and difficulty in our case).

=> Therefore, the answer is that God cannot create such a task not because His power is limited, but because of God’s power being INFINITE, UNLIMITED, and BOUNDLESS.



REBUTTAL


Con: "If God can't create a stone he can't lift, then he is limited to not being able to create that stone."


Non-sequitur!

God cannot create such a stone because His power is UNLIMITED nad nothing can be greater than something UNLIMITED.

It is a logical fallacy to say that since an unlimited power cannot create something that was greater than an unlimited power, then the unlimited power is not unlimited, but limited.



A:
Limited by what?


B: By creating such a stone.

A: Creation of such a stone requires something greater than infinity (this makes no mathematical sense) or greater than something unlimited which makes no sense.



Therefore, God cannot create such a thing because such a thing cannot exist.. and this doesn't mean that God's power is limited, but it is due to God's power being UNLIMITED or BOUNDLESS.




Let me explain it through a mathematical example.


Q:
Is it possible for a number greater than infinity to exist?


A: No, because infinity is boundless and unlimited. Existence of such a number implies that something is greater than infinity or greater than something unlimited which makes no sense and it is to beg the definition of infinity or unlimited.




CONCLUSION


God cannot create a stone he cannot lift, simply because HIS POWER IS UNLIMITED, and nothing can possibly exist that can be greater than something unlimited.


Claiming that "Since God cannot create something that is greater than His UNLIMITED power, then His UNLIMITED power is LIMITED" is completely NON-SEQUITUR, logically fallacious and it is just begging the definition of UNLIMITED. Therefore, this claim is nonsensical.



SOURCES


[1] http://www.iep.utm.edu...;

Debate Round No. 1
TheNextDaVinci

Con

TheNextDaVinci forfeited this round.
ssadi

Pro

Unfortunately my opponent forfeited. I will continue..



THE QUESTION OF STONE PARADOX IS NONSENSE


- Can a question be wrong or incomplete?
- Yes, it can.
- How can a question be wrong or incomplete? It is just a question. An answer can be true, wrong, or incomplete; but not a question.
- Some questions provide some information and/or some assumptions which are wrong, hence the question will be wrong.
- For example?
- Let me give three questions and explain why they are wrong or incomplete questions.



Question 1:


Q: What is the value of a real number x if it is given that x is less than 4 and greater than 5?


- This question makes an assumption which is wrong. It assumes that a real number can be both less than 4 and greater than 5 at the same time. After making this assumption it asks what this number is.


OR


- This questin gives a wrong information / makes a wrong claim. It claims that a real number exists which is less than 4 and greater than 5 which is wrong. After making this wrong claim it asks us what this number is.


OR


- This question claims that it is given that x is less than 4 and greater than 5 which is wrong. It cannot be given that a real number is less than 4 and greater than 5 at the same time.


The question asks something that should be true according to a wrong claim/information/assumption, therefore the question is wrong.

Furthermore, the correct answer to this question is “There is no such a number” which refutes the information/claim/assumption of the question (discussed above), therefore this answer proves that the question is wrong.




Question 2:


Assume that there is a mysterious village where each of the people of that village either always lies or always tells the truth. John and Mark are from this village and they make the following statements about each other.


John: Mark is a liar.

Mark: John is telling the truth.

Q: Who is a liar; John or Mark?

There are 4 possible answers to this question; 1-both are truth-tellers, 2-John is a truth-teller and Mark is a liar, 3-Mark is a truth-teller and John is a liar, 4-both are liars.

According to the assumption and information given above, none of these answers are true, i.e., each of all 4 answers contradicts the assumption and information given above.

Therefore, the question is wrong because the information and assumption made for this question are wrong.




Question 3:

Q: What is the value of y?



This question doesn’t give any information about y, therefore this question is incomplete and cannot be answered.



Similarly, the question that “Can an omnipotent God create a stone he cannot lift” is a wrong and incomplete question and, therefore, nonsensical. Here are the reasons.

1) The word “lifting” only makes sense when there is an object, m1 (e.g., Earth), which attracts OR pulls other objects and one tries to move another object, m2 (e.g., a stone), up/away from its surface.

There is no information about what would “lifting” mean for an infinitely huge stone, since anything smaller than this stone would be of a finite size and mass. Anything finite is zero compared to infinity. If such a stone existed, then there would be no non-zero force acting on it. Therefore, the word “lifting” for such a is wrong, incomplete and nonsensical.


2) The question assumes that such a stone can exist, which is a wrong assumption. Because if God's power is unlimited, then the difficulty of lifting of this stone, even if we assumed that it made any sense, has to be greater than infinite difficulty. Since the assumption made in the question cannot be true and what is asked in the question cannot exist (like a real number x which is greater than 5 and less than 4), then the question is wrong.


Furthermore, there is no such a stone that an infinitely powerful God couldn't "lift". It is like asking that can something exist while it doesn't exist? Similarly, the question of this debate is asking can something unlimited be limited? Well, it doesn't make any sense, at all.


Therefore, God cannot create such a stone not because it is too difficult so that it showed that God's power is limited.. on the contrary, it is because of His power being unlimited.



CONCLUSION


The question doesn't make any reasonable sense. Therefore, drawing conclusions, such as one that Con tries to do, is much more nonsensical than the question itself.




MY SOURCE OF R1 - corrected


[1] http://www.iep.utm.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
TheNextDaVinci

Con

TheNextDaVinci forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
TheNextDaVinci

Con

TheNextDaVinci forfeited this round.
ssadi

Pro

Extend.

Vote Pro please!
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 8 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Shrekoning/ Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: I am not religious, but Pro clearly won here.

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD, just an restatement of the decision.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 8 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: ZachZimmey// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Much better arguments/ reasoning, forfeiture.

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD, just a restatement of the decision. The voter only explains conduct.
************************************************************************
Posted by rextr05 9 months ago
rextr05
Pretty much the same logic that God cannot make 2 + 2 = 5.

For if God exists then he is a being that can lift all stones. A stone that is so heavy that God cannot lift it is therefore an impossible object. The understanding of omnipotence, remember, God is able to do anything possible, but not anything impossible, and creating a stone that God cannot lift is something impossible.

The paradox of the stone, then, can be resolved; it fails to show that there is an incoherence in the theistic conception of God, and so fails to demonstrate that God does not exist.
Posted by ssadi 9 months ago
ssadi
Dear @TheNextDaVinci,

You are running out of time, just wanted to remind you...
Posted by ssadi 9 months ago
ssadi
I noticed that the link of my source doesn't work.. I am re-posting it here:

http://www.iep.utm.edu...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Peepette 8 months ago
Peepette
TheNextDaVincissadiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO presents some well formulated arguments which are essentially. God cannot create a stone greater than he can lift, to do so would counter the nature of god?s infinite omnipotence and power. CON FFs several rounds thus, no rebuttals. PRO has the debate. Conduct to PRO. S&G tied text readable from both sides. Sources to PRO due to affect in bolstering his argument.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 8 months ago
dsjpk5
TheNextDaVincissadiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff many times, so conduct to Pro.