God’s Little Corner: A Question for the Believers
We will now take literary notice of the “fact” that there is a God. So, given that we all now believe in the existence of an all powerful deity here is the question:
Can God create a bigger rock than he can roll?
Please leave your response in comments and don’t forget you are only being asked to believe in God on Friday.
About Post Author
Professor Mike
More Stories
Parlez-vous and Red Roses Too
Roses are a girl’s best friend, or so I’ve been told; at the same time, wondering why I wasn’t my...
Living In A Dead Man’s Town
The following contains extremely violent images some may find distressing. This is Part One of my anthology—you can find Part...
Sacred and Profane: The Complexity of Prison Spirituality
I’ve watched this unfold repeatedly, and I'm struck by the theater of it all each time. The inmates walk into...
MMA Is Saying Goodbye To Politics and Hello To People and Pets
Just in time for Christmas, I am changing our format from politics to just people and pets. Life is too...
The Best Tips On Interviewing Someone for a Job
One of the most essential elements of a recruiting process is to conduct interviews to choose the right candidates.
WTF? Loony Pat Robertson Leads Viewers In Creepy Prayer Against Dr. Ford
https://youtu.be/oyGx40KKO14 by Michael John Scott Loopy Pat Robertson is at the top of the list when you thought you've seen...
im trying to come to terms with this. if such a deity were to make such a rock, then wouldnt its purpose be to stay put?. i mean a rock is nothing more than a big large grain of sand right? ..a big nough wind can move gazillions of tons of ..sand.. in the big picture a desert full of other un movable grains of sand.. just need the right wind ..in the right galaxy ..jes sayin..
Yes God could do this…The big fucking God rock, now referred as the BFGR, is created in a superposition quantum state.
Because of the uncertainity of the physical nature of the rock created in Hilbert Time-Space, the rock is both rollable and yet also unrollable.
The BFGR state would continue in this flux of quantum coherency until measured or observed. Once observed, the quantum nature of the BFGR collapses into a definable state of Holy Roller-ness. But because God chooses not observe the BFGR, the question can be answered with a obvious yes/no.
Hey, what can you expect from someone that responds to questions with answers like “I am what I am”?
You sound like that Schrödinger guy who used to do nasty stuff with cats…..
Actually, Schrodinger initially wanted to use his brother-in-law for that mind experiment but was later changed to a cat.
As for me, I am still in constant struggle with the “Chicken and the Egg” paradox.
The paradox “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” is an easy one for me. Eggs have been around for millions of years; reptiles hatch from eggs. What most people mean, but don’t actually ask is “Which came first, the chicken or ITS egg?” That’s much harder to know.
The trouble with most paradoxical questions is in the wording. Could God lift that super heavy rock? Yes, even if it was too heavy for Her to lift. That’s what the human concept of omnipotence encompasses. God is an all-powerful being that can create rocks too heavy for Herself to lift, then, lift them when she chooses.
The thing about God, I believe, is that the faithful have no trouble seeing the two sides of this rock at the same time. Schrodinger’s cat is both alive and dead. Those who are questioning can only see the rock as being too heavy or God as being able to lift it. God is all things. And being all things requires a finesse that only the innocent or over-analyzers can come to terms with. Other folks call it coincidence.
Krell,
If you’re referring to Popeye, “I yam what I yam” used to seem kinda prophetic to me.
LOL Osori
I think it was something like “I am what I is” that Yahweh said to Moses which seems sort of vague and lacking in proper sentence structure.
Actually “Ehyeh asher ehyeh” or “I am that I am” seems a lot more confusing than Popeye’s constant wood for Olive Oyl, so I leaning towards the “I yam what I yam” as the more prophetic.
Geez! I prefer Popeye to Yahweh but I guess that is the whole point eh?
BFGR..That is who we represent from this point on 🙂 I wish we could turn it into an acronym. As you know that is not an acronym. It doesn’t make a word..
If god is omnipotent, then why are his followers so stupid?
IF there is anything like an omnipotent anything, it abandoned Earth many years ago.
Jerry,
Good question! Maybe the warranty on mankind expired a long time ago?
That would be a good thing for theologians to discuss.Was there a divine service contract offered which we didn’t take advantage of?
And did it include free oil changes?
LOL Oso. Personally I believe our warranty has long since expired:-)
The omnipotence paradox is a family of related paradoxes addressing the question of what is possible for an omnipotent being to do. The paradox states that if the being can perform such actions, then it can limit its own ability to perform actions and hence it cannot perform all actions, yet, on the other hand, if it cannot limit its own actions, then that is something it cannot do.
One version of the omnipotence paradox is the so-called paradox of the stone: “Could [an omnipotent being] create a stone so heavy that even that being could not lift it?” If so, then it seems that the being could cease to be omnipotent; if not, it seems that the being was not omnipotent to begin with. A common response is that since God is omnipotent, the phrase “could not lift” doesn’t make sense and the paradox is meaningless.
Thomas Aquinas asserts that the paradox arises from a misunderstanding of omnipotence. He maintains that inherent contradictions and logical impossibilities do not fall under the omnipotence of God. J. L Cowan sees this paradox as a reason to reject the concept of absolute omnipotence, while others, such as Descartes, argue that God is absolutely omnipotent, despite the problem.
SO THERE.
Good stuff Holte!
I think Mike could have asked a better question, such as if God created an enormous rock, would mankind be better served if said rock rolled over a teabag convention or if it dropped on the convention?
Good old Wikipedia.
Yea! Why didn’t I think of that?
Such problems arise because of the way religion uses language. Words like “omnipotent” and “omniscient” refer to abstract absolutes which don’t correspond to anything in the real universe which language normally tries to describe.
The few absolutes that really do exist, such as the speed of light, have to be defined so that they don’t contradict each other, since the real universe those definitions describe doesn’t contradict itself.
It’s very easy to use language to describe something which is impossible because its qualities contradict each other, such as a four-sided triangle, but such descriptions can’t correspond to anything in the real universe. Religion, because it uses so many absolutes, routinely runs into the same problem.
I think, Infidel, I would more readily understand the concept of the four-sided triangle before I would accept the presence of an “omnipotent” being.
I would be tempted to call a 4-sided triangle a rectangle.
Hey yeah! Wassup with that anyway? So what is a four-sided triangle?
No.
Or, rather the answer is, Mu! Zen koan stuff.
Yes! Karn ieaa limpusdickus.
Back in my old AOL chatroom days, I used to like to argue creationists. I hammered at a few of them one night for a hour or more, trying to force them to answer the following question:
If god chose to do so, could god have used evolution as a means of creation?
They couldn’t answer no, because then god would be powerless. They couldn’t answer yes, because they were so invested in the creation crap. So, in short, their heads spun, and they would invariably devolve into a “you f’ing bitch” rant.
Ahhhh, those were the heady days of dial-up 🙂
Bee you were kickin’ ass and taking names even then!
HEHE, that’s how Mr. Bee fell in love with me 🙂 We met in an AOL chatroom.
Bee that is so cool.
if God set out to make a rock bigger than He could roll, He would do so and not be able to roll it.If He then chose to be able to roll that unrollable rock, He would then roll it.
Of course, consider the source-I’m a true believer. Just one of the non-controlling non-judgmental kind. You can spot us by the LA Dodger hats we wear.
That’s it! That is how “rock n’ roll” was invented! Sweet 🙂
you know they got a helluva band!
You mean you didn’t know God exists and has since the late 60’s? I thought everyone knew! I even touched his foot once at his last Ziggy concert. Didn’t wash my hand for weeks!
I’m shocked. You didn’t know God existed!
I will forward your apologies to Mr Bowie forthwith.
Long live the queen!
If God is omnipotent and omniscient, can he surprise himself?
If God is omnipotent and immortal, can he kill himself?
If God is omnipotent and all-good, can he choose to do evil?
So the questions beg the question Infidel: Can God answer all of those questions?
Not now. He slipped and hit his head on that un-rollable rock.
You are assuming that God can slip. If he can, in fact, slip, can he slip on the his own rock that he made bigger than he can roll??
We watch the same tv MM!! LMFAO
What TV?
LOL! I had Tiveoed it Gwen and just saw it a little while ago. I thought…now that is one hell of a question.
If any omnipotent deity creates a rock so big he cannot roll it, then he is not omnipotent deity, no matter what day it is.
Well for Jesus’ sake Holte. A real Jumper would never have been been able to come up with that. Regardless the question is “can he” not “would he?” 🙂