Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

See more
See less

God and the Big Rock

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • God and the Big Rock

    What about this question?

    Link

    ------

    What about this common objection? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

    Within the past week, I have seen the objection shared on a Facebook group I’m in and realized I don’t think I’ve ever written on it. You’ve probably heard it before. Can God make a rock so big that He can’t lift it? This is a case where there are some real atheist objections and then there are some that people think they’re saying something profound, and they’re really not.

    The short answer is no. God can’t do this. It can’t be done because it involves a contradiction. A rock is finite and God is infinite and this would mean the rock would need to be finite and infinite. C.S. Lewis once said “God can” does not make nonsense any less nonsense.

    The reality also is that this does raise up good questions about omnipotence. Unfortunately for internet atheists, Christians were already raising up these objections long before they came along. This was especially so in the medieval times. Consider this much more simple question that does raise a question on what omnipotence is. Can God swim?

    We might be able to say Jesus could in the incarnation, but apart from that, could He? We know God can become a man, but could He become a cucumber? In each of these cases, we can discuss what it means for God to be God and what natures are compatible in some way with deity.

    One objection also was if God could change the past. Thomas Aquinas said no. Again, this is a deep question and the TheologyWeb forum I’m a part of long ago had a good laugh about it. This was shortly before the massive meteor shower that wiped out Seattle. Oh? You don’t remember that? I had prayed about it. You’re welcome.

    What about omniscience? One could ask if God knows what it’s like to sin. He could know in the sense of understanding our experience, but not in the sense of experiencing our experience. This raises the question of what knowledge is much like the earlier question raised was what power is and what it can do.

    We’ve been asking these questions for centuries. They’re not new. Unfortunately for internet atheists, since they don’t read contrary thought and don’t know the history of ideas, they miss out on these. One saying I have is that those who don’t read will always be at the mercy of those who do.

    Again, there are real atheist objections, like the problem of evil. This is not one of them. Atheists who use objections like the big rock think they are revealing something profound, and they are, but the problem is it’s only their own ignorance.

    In Christ,
    Nick Peters
    (And I affirm the virgin birth)

  • #2
    For me, this one has always been pretty easy to dispel --- God is the AUTHOR of the laws of physics - he is not bound by them.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #3
      I always thought that the "can God make a rock so big that He can’t lift it?" was just part of an old George Carlin joke.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        I always thought that the "can God make a rock so big that He can’t lift it?" was just part of an old George Carlin joke.
        I've never taken it as a serious argument - it seems it's a "junior atheist" kind of thing.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

          I've never taken it as a serious argument - it seems it's a "junior atheist" kind of thing.
          Yeah, it's not very well thought out. Carlin even cites it as the sorta question that the kids at his parochial school would come up with to try to stump the priest (IIRC his imitation of them asking makes it clear he, even though an atheist, was fairly contemptuous of it -- you generally don't make someone you agree with sound like an imbecile talking when you imitate them)

          A better question might be "could God limit His own ability to lift a heavy rock?" or maybe even "Is God capable of being incapable?" In his Summa Theologica Aquinas, while examining the question of whether God can make the past not to have been, argues that "there does not fall under the scope of God's omnipotence anything that implies a contradiction" which IMHO effectively means that any intrinsic contradiction or logical impossibility isn't a part of God's omnipotence. IOW, while inherent contradictions make for great rhetorical literary devices they aren't a valid question for theology.



          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            Yeah, it's not very well thought out. Carlin even cites it as the sorta question that the kids at his parochial school would come up with to try to stump the priest (IIRC his imitation of them asking makes it clear he, even though an atheist, was fairly contemptuous of it -- you generally don't make someone you agree with sound like an imbecile talking when you imitate them)

            A better question might be "could God limit His own ability to lift a heavy rock?" or maybe even "Is God capable of being incapable?" In his Summa Theologica Aquinas, while examining the question of whether God can make the past not to have been, argues that "there does not fall under the scope of God's omnipotence anything that implies a contradiction" which IMHO effectively means that any intrinsic contradiction or logical impossibility isn't a part of God's omnipotence. IOW, while inherent contradictions make for great rhetorical literary devices they aren't a valid question for theology.

            Which is, pretty much, what Jesus did when talking about the "meek", which many mistake for the "weak". I've heard "meek" explained as "power under control".

            We have a cowboy who does a "Sermon on the Mount" (mounted on a horse ) and one of the examples he would use was to have a great big ol' Clydesdale in the arena, and put an egg on a little platform in the middle. The Clydesdale would come over and lift it's great big heavy front hoof, and place it on the egg, and roll the egg off the platform into the dirt, unbroken. One of the best visuals I've ever seen for "power under control".

            Jesus exercised tremendous "power under control" when he didn't ZAP everybody who was crucifying Him.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

              Which is, pretty much, what Jesus did when talking about the "meek", which many mistake for the "weak". I've heard "meek" explained as "power under control".

              We have a cowboy who does a "Sermon on the Mount" (mounted on a horse ) and one of the examples he would use was to have a great big ol' Clydesdale in the arena, and put an egg on a little platform in the middle. The Clydesdale would come over and lift it's great big heavy front hoof, and place it on the egg, and roll the egg off the platform into the dirt, unbroken. One of the best visuals I've ever seen for "power under control".

              Jesus exercised tremendous "power under control" when he didn't ZAP everybody who was crucifying Him.
              Unfortunately when you see a picture of someone described as "meek and mild-mannered" it's always of someone who looks like a milquetoast wimp

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                Unfortunately when you see a picture of someone described as "meek and mild-mannered" it's always of someone who looks like a milquetoast wimp
                Yeah, and Jesus is pictured too many times as some kind of sissy.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                  Yeah, and Jesus is pictured too many times as some kind of sissy.
                  Whenever someone says WWJD? They always seem to overlook John 2:13-16

                  There are times to be meek and there are the other times as well

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                • #10
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  Whenever someone says WWJD? They always seem to overlook John 2:13-16

                  There are times to be meek and there are the other times as well
                  And the whole bit where He says he came to bring a sword, not peace --- they always magically mysteriously omit that.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    I admit to having little sympathy for questions of this type.

                    The Bible tells us what it is most needful for us to know. It is designed to glorify God, and to further the salvation of sinners, most of all by setting before us Jesus Chridt. It is not designed to satisfy idle curiosity, or captious quibbling. It reveals to us the character of the God with whom we have to do - but it does not “pick God’s brains”. We cannot profit from it if we approach in a spirit of idle curiosity. It is like the ground round about the Burning Bush: it is “holy ground”, because it is the word of God the Holy One. And to “tremblie at the word” of this great God, Who is not a man, excludes vain curiosity and captious questioning; just as the rapturousness of love does so.

                    What one is driving at, is, that this is the wrong kind of question. It is like asking, “How long is God ?” - the question is framed in terms that, as worded, make no sense as applied to God. The questiom is doubly meaningless, fior the Bible answers questions related to it. The Bible has a lot to say about God and rocks. And about God’s power - which is what that question is driving at. The power of God is displayed epecially in creation, salvation and the renewal of creation - not in magical and unmeaning parlour-tricks such as that postulated in the question. The question has a strong flavour of the mocking command to Christ: “Prophesy ! Prophesy !”. God is not a circus animal, to be subjected to man’s will or whims.

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      It plays with definitions, although with more subtlety. Can God make a square circle? Or a married bachelor?

                      Of course He can because He can change the definitions. The same with the rock.

                      Comment

                      Related Threads

                      Collapse

                      Topics Statistics Last Post
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-06-2024, 04:30 PM
                      1 response
                      18 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-01-2024, 09:43 PM
                      1 response
                      30 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-25-2024, 09:42 AM
                      0 responses
                      11 views
                      1 like
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-15-2024, 09:22 PM
                      0 responses
                      18 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-09-2024, 09:39 AM
                      28 responses
                      200 views
                      1 like
                      Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                      Working...
                      X