Can God create a stone heavier than Him?

[Abdul Fattah]

Howdy doody SteveThe problem with this is that you don't actually know that and can't possibly know that. All you know is what you've been told, whether that is the truth or not you have no idea, unless you claim to know the mind of God.

I understand your criticism towards the teachings of islam in this issue. However, those are two seperate issues. One is the debate on wheter or not omnipotence is flawed by concept. Wheter or not Islam is genuine is a whole different issue. Mixing the two toghether really doesn't help either of us defending our viewpoints.

One could argue God has been known to be fraudulent.
PICKTHAL 3:54 And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.

Well if you see the context created by the other verses; that creates a whole new perspective. Not the image of a fraudulent God, but more the image of a God that counters the plans of those who plotted.

 

[Keltoi]

I still think the argument that "what God creates is dependant upon Him" is the best one. That statement means a variety of things. What God creates He can obviously "uncreate". God decides what He will create and for what purpose. Nature, the laws of physics, and other natural observable phenomena are also dependant upon God's Will.

That is what theists understand about God's nature. Anything beyond that is like an ant in the ocean, we cannot even comprehend the situation much less ask the right questions.

 

[Azy]

I understand your criticism towards the teachings of islam in this issue. However, those are two seperate issues. One is the debate on wheter or not omnipotence is flawed by concept. Wheter or not Islam is genuine is a whole different issue. Mixing the two toghether really doesn't help either of us defending our viewpoints.

Well it seems to me that omnipotence in the mind of believers always goes hand in hand with omnibenevolence, which is why I brought that up. I feel this is more a case of wishful rather than rational thinking, since an omnipotent being can do pretty much anything on any scale.


Anyway, omnipotence. The argument against creating a rock heavier than God can lift fails on a logical basis. Is it valid though, logically, that you could create something (a rock) which is infinite in it's properties (mass, spatial dimensions)? Is infinity a practical reality?

Well if you see the context created by the other verses; that creates a whole new perspective. Not the image of a fraudulent God, but more the image of a God that counters the plans of those who plotted.

He always uses the right words and there are plenty of words which would have had less negative connotations makr definitely gives a 'deceitful' impression.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Well it seems to me that omnipotence in the mind of believers always goes hand in hand with omnibenevolence, which is why I brought that up. I feel this is more a case of wishful rather than rational thinking, since an omnipotent being can do pretty much anything on any scale.

Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't, I still think the debate on whether or not it is logically flawed, and whether or not it is genuine should be separated =)

Anyway, omnipotence. The argument against creating a rock heavier than God can lift fails on a logical basis. Is it valid though, logically, that you could create something (a rock) which is infinite in it's properties (mass, spatial dimensions)? Is infinity a practical reality?

That depends, personally I don't believe that infinity exists within this universe. So therefor I would be inclined to think that God wouldn't be able to create an infinite thing since that is a thing with contradicting characteristics (like a squared circle, or a dark light). This is of course biased by my belief that infinity doesn't exist in this universe, which is my personal opinion, and not a mainstream Islamic nor scientific fact. Still I don't see this in a flaw of omnipotence, since I don't think the semantical value of omnipotence includes the possibility of creating impossible things.

He always uses the right words and there are plenty of words which would have had less negative connotations makr definitely gives a 'deceitful' impression.

Well I'm not an expert in Arabic, so I wouldn't be able to say. however for the sake of argument, even if you are right, I would still disagree with your conclusion. I would argue that deceiving the deceitful does not make an entity "deceitful" itself; since in this specific case deceiving the deceitful appears to be justifiable in my opinion. Or in simple terms that even a child could understand: "they started it!"

 

[Abdu-l-Majeed]

I question why Muslims think all created things are dependent on Allah. What evidence do you have for this?
For example, take matter/energy. Science has shown that matter and energy can't be created or destroyed. It does not appear to be depend on anything. If you keep atoms in a box, with complete conservation of momentum, the atoms will continue bouncing around for all eternity.

If you say matter is depend on the will and thoughts of Allah, but why even go there? Why the extra step? Why not just accept matter exists and that's that?

We were talking about creating an all-powerful being. Like I said: even if we'd suppose that such a creation is possible, we can't call it all-poweful, as it couldn't create itself, rather it needed a creator.

Seems to me, that questions like these are misused by atheists. Questions like these only proove that it's easily to trick the human brain, it doesn't say nothing about God.

 

[Azy]

I would argue that deceiving the deceitful does not make an entity "deceitful" itself; since in this specific case deceiving the deceitful appears to be justifiable in my opinion. Or in simple terms that even a child could understand: "they started it!"

Well it shows he has chosen not to forfeit all 'negative' abilities, as you suggested he might.

Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't, I still think the debate on whether or not it is logically flawed, and whether or not it is genuine should be separated =)

Fair enough, i'll stay on track from here on.

That depends, personally I don't believe that infinity exists within this universe. So therefor I would be inclined to think that God wouldn't be able to create an infinite thing since that is a thing with contradicting characteristics (like a squared circle, or a dark light). This is of course biased by my belief that infinity doesn't exist in this universe, which is my personal opinion, and not a mainstream Islamic nor scientific fact. Still I don't see this in a flaw of omnipotence, since I don't think the semantical value of omnipotence includes the possibility of creating impossible things.

Whether inside or outside this universe, if God has the power to create and he is described as having unlimited power, he can create without limits.

How would you describe it?

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Well it shows he has chosen not to forfeit all 'negative' abilities, as you suggested he might.

If by exception in this case, the deceit is justifiable, then that means it is not "negative".

Whether inside or outside this universe, if God has the power to create and he is described as having unlimited power, he can create without limits. How would you describe it?

I'm afraid we're running into semantics again. Take the squared circle for example, if God cannot create it, do you consider that a flaw in omnipotence to? Or would you agree that this is not a limit to the creative powers, but a limit to existence itself.

 

[aamirsaab]

Just came back from a jimas conference and this particular topic was actually covered by Sheik Shabir 'The Man' Aly.

He gave two answers to these sorts of questions:
A) it is a contradictory question and thus cannot even be considered a question.
B) it is not a matter of God can and God can not. It is a matter of God Does or God Does not.

End of.

 

[DAWUD_adnan]

Allah is able to do ALL things. But out of his Grace He has forbidden for Himself somethings. For instance, He doesn't oppress His creation. The answer is also simple, a Stone being of a stone itself has been given limits by Allah, because it is a finite object, it wouldn't be a stone anymore if the implied where to be conducted.

 

[Azy]

If by exception in this case, the deceit is justifiable, then that means it is not "negative".

I think 'justified' and 'negative' in this case are both subjective and I doubt we'll agree on either.

I'm afraid we're running into semantics again. Take the squared circle for example, if God cannot create it, do you consider that a flaw in omnipotence to? Or would you agree that this is not a limit to the creative powers, but a limit to existence itself.

I didn't think what I said to be particularly paradoxical. It would help me if you explained exactly what you understand omnipotence to mean rather than gradually picking off my suggestions one by one.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

I think 'justified' and 'negative' in this case are both subjective and I doubt we'll agree on either.

Yes probably

I didn't think what I said to be particularly paradoxical. It would help me if you explained exactly what you understand omnipotence to mean rather than gradually picking off my suggestions one by one.

Well, I think we agree on the same defenition, but simply disagree on how we interpret the details of that defenition.
Btw, lets not forget that I'm taking the defensive stance here against the argument of the impossible stone, meaning it's only natural for me to "gradually pick" on suggestions ^_^
But you're welcome to do the same with my arguments, like in the perfection of shariah thread.

 

[Azy]

Well, I think we agree on the same defenition, but simply disagree on how we interpret the details of that defenition.
Btw, lets not forget that I'm taking the defensive stance here against the argument of the impossible stone, meaning it's only natural for me to "gradually pick" on suggestions ^_^
But you're welcome to do the same with my arguments, like in the perfection of shariah thread.

Well it's going to be difficult if you keep telling me that we disagree but not what it is we are likely to disagree on, or why.

What are the restrictions on God's power as you see it?

I remember seeing an estimate of the volume of the universe at (as an example) 10^79 cubic metres. Is it beyond his capability to create one that is 10^80 cubic metres? (10^80)^80? That to the power of the number of photons in the universe?

(oh yeah I'm going to get back to the sharia and free will threads there are quite a lot of things to think about on here and i get distracted )

 

[MuhammadRizan]

salam every one!

what's the point of GOD Creating that kind of rock anyway? God supposed to be ALL WISE, ALL KNOWING i will never bow to stupid god..creating pointless thing.

do GOD have weight in the first place?

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Well it's going to be difficult if you keep telling me that we disagree but not what it is we are likely to disagree on, or why.

What are the restrictions on God's power as you see it?

Well like I said there are no restrictions on his power, but there are concequences of choice, and restrictions on existence, and so on. In other words what I'm trying to say is that in my opinion none of these things we discussed are not a result of restrictions on God's power, but rather a concequence of something else.

I remember seeing an estimate of the volume of the universe at (as an example) 10^79 cubic metres. Is it beyond his capability to create one that is 10^80 cubic metres? (10^80)^80? That to the power of the number of photons in the universe?

Its impossible to create something of 10^80 within an area of 10^70, but it wouldn't be impossible to create it outside of the universe.

(oh yeah I'm going to get back to the sharia and free will threads there are quite a lot of things to think about on here and i get distracted )

No problem, whenever you have the time

 

[Muezzin]

salam every one!

what's the point of GOD Creating that kind of rock anyway?

To facilitate comparative religion topics?

 

[chacha_jalebi]

this thread is beginnin to be borin and you know what hapens after threads become borin...

do we all agree

 

[Güven]

^I agree

 

[Uthman]

I don't agree. The debate is still going on between Azy and Steve. I think it's quite interesting atch. In the event that the thread gets closed, please delete this post of mine. Tar.

 

[Azy]

Well like I said there are no restrictions on his power, but there are concequences of choice, and restrictions on existence, and so on. In other words what I'm trying to say is that in my opinion none of these things we discussed are not a result of restrictions on God's power, but rather a concequence of something else.

ok

Its impossible to create something of 10^80 within an area of 10^70, but it wouldn't be impossible to create it outside of the universe.

I did mean as an alternative to the current one, rather than within it.
So if it wouldn't be a problem for him to make a bigger one instead of this one would his unrestricted power allow him to create one of unrestricted size?

 

[Converse02]

We were talking about creating an all-powerful being. Like I said: even if we'd suppose that such a creation is possible, we can't call it all-poweful, as it couldn't create itself, rather it needed a creator.

Seems to me, that questions like these are misused by atheists. Questions like these only proove that it's easily to trick the human brain, it doesn't say nothing about God.

Being all-powerful refers to ability, not origin. Another being created can still be called all-powerful if it is given by Creator the ability to do anything.
I'm not asking if it can "create itself" and agree such a question doesn't make sense.

Can God create another all-powerful being or not?

Questions like this are not misused by atheists. These questions are legitimate as they question how a being can be defined as "all-powerful" and requests what exactly that means. Atheists are saying no being can conceivably be "all-powerful," therefore the definition of God is incoherent.