Search

Summary

It may seem that this Article is unnecessary – isn’t God’s omnipotence already plain from the earlier demonstration of His complete actuality and His primacy in the order of causes? Yes, and in that sense, the Article proves nothing new. However, our imaginary Objectors think they have compelling reasons to think that God couldn’t be omnipotent. If they are right, then despite appearances, the previous arguments must have been flawed somehow, and we need to backtrack and find out how. St. Thomas finds that each Objection misunderstands what it means for God to be omnipotent. So despite the wording of the “whether” in the title of this Article, the real question is not so much whether God is omnipotent, but what it means for Him to be omnipotent.

Classical theists hold that God is omnipotent. But now suppose a critical atheologian were to ask: Can God create a stone so heavy that even he cannot lift it? This is the dilemma of the stone paradox. God either can or cannot create such a stone. Suppose that God can create it. Then there's something he cannot do – namely, lift the stone. Suppose that God cannot create the stone. Then, again, there's something he cannot do – namely, create it. Either way, God cannot be omnipotent. Among the variety of known theological paradoxes, the paradox of the stone is especially troubling because of its logical purity. It purports to show that one cannot believe in both God and the laws of logic. In the face of the stone paradox, how should the contemporary analytic theist respond? Ought they to revise their belief in theology or their belief in logic? Ought they to lose their religion or lose their mind?

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

2 results

Question 25 - The Power of God

Summary

God and the Problem of Logic

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

Save Search

2 results

Question 25 - The Power of God

Summary

God and the Problem of Logic