Paradox of Omnipotence and the Lifting Rock Dilemma
The paradox of omnipotence, often encapsulated in the "lifting rock dilemma," questions whether an omnipotent being can create a rock so heavy that even it cannot lift it. This philosophical problem explores the nature and limits of divine power. The core of the issue lies in defining what "omnipotence" truly entails [5].
Christian theological traditions generally agree that God's omnipotence means God can do all things that are possible, but this does not extend to logical contradictions or impossibilities [5]. Thomas Aquinas, for instance, states that "God can do all things that are possible" and that it is no limitation on God's power to say He cannot do the impossible [5]. Charles Hodge, one theologian, similarly argues that contradictions are not objects of power. He explains that saying God cannot do the impossible (e.g., make right wrong, or the finite infinite) is not a limitation of His power, just as it is not a limitation of His wisdom that He cannot teach the untrue [4]. Such assumptions, Hodge contends, would destroy the idea of God as a rational being [4].
This understanding implies that the "lifting rock dilemma" presents a false dilemma because it proposes a logically impossible scenario. An omnipotent being, by definition, would not be subject to such a contradiction. The ability to create a rock that cannot be lifted by the creator inherently implies a limitation on the creator's power, which contradicts the premise of omnipotence. Therefore, the question itself is considered flawed by these theological perspectives.
The concept of omnipotence is central to the understanding of God in various traditions. Tertullian, an early Church Father, describes God the Father as omnipotent because "He has power over all things, i.e., over heaven and earth, sun, moon, and stars, and all things in them" [1]. This power is exercised through His Son, who is also described as omnipotent [1]. In Reformed theology, the efficacy of God's omnipotence is emphasized, asserting that "nothing can resist almighty power" [2].
The discussion of omnipotence also extends to Christology, particularly concerning the human and divine natures of Jesus. Some theological views, such as certain Lutheran perspectives, have debated whether Christ's human nature could be considered omniscient or omnipotent. Hodge critiques the idea that the attributes of the divine nature are transferred to the human nature, arguing that if there is no such transfer, then Christ's human nature is no more omniscient or almighty than a miracle worker is omnipotent [3]. He further notes that the idea of Christ's flesh and blood being omnipresent seems to involve a contradiction, and appealing to God's omnipotence does not resolve this, as contradictions are not subject to divine power [4].
The term "dilemma" itself appears in other contexts within religious texts, such as the Babylonian Talmud, where it refers to unresolved legal or ethical questions [6, 7, 8]. For example, one rabbinic dilemma concerns whether "two forces in one person" performing an action are considered like one person (making them liable) or two people (making them exempt) [6]. These instances highlight that "dilemma" in a religious context often refers to a complex problem requiring careful consideration, rather than a logical impossibility that undermines a fundamental attribute of God.
Sources
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. II.--ON CHRIST. (part 12): glory of God the Father."(5) Therefore He is the efflux of the glory of God in this respect, that He is omnipotent--the pure and limpid Wisdom herself--glorified as the efflux of omnipotence or of glory. And that it may be more clearly nnderstood what the glory of omnipotence is, we shall add the following. God the Father is omnipotent, because He has power over all things, i.e., over heaven and earth, sun, moon, and stars, and all things in them. And He exercises His power over them by means of His ”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 6: If an act of omnipotence, it is certainly efficacious, for nothing can resist almighty power. The Lutherans indeed deny this. But the more orthodox of them mean simply that the sinner can keep himself aloof from the means through which, or, rather, in connection with which it pleases God to exercise his power. He can absent himself from the preaching of the Word, and the use of the sacraments. Or he may voluntarily place himself in such an inward posture of resistance as determines God not to exert his power in his regeneration. The assert”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 83: urged by Lutherans as well as others against the Romish doctrine of transubstantiation that it supposes the accidents, or attributes of the bread and wine in the Eucharist, to continue when their substance no longer exists. In like manner, according to the Lutheran doctrine, the attributes of the divine nature or essence are transferred to another essence. If there be no such transfer or communication, then the human nature of Christ is no more omniscient or almighty, than the worker of a miracle is omnipotent. If the divine nature only e”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 71: same time, much less that it should fill all space. The idea that the flesh and blood of Christ are omnipresent, seems to involve a contradiction. It is in vain to appeal to the omnipotence of God. Contradictions are not the objects of power. It is no more a limitation of the power of God to say that He cannot do the impossible, that He cannot make right wrong, or the finite infinite, than it is a limitation of his wisdom that He cannot teach the untrue or the unwise. All such assumptions destroy the idea of God as a rational Being. If th”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, First Part (Prima Pars), The Power of God, Art. 3: Article: Whether God is omnipotent? I answer that, All confess that God is omnipotent; but it seems difficult to explain in what His omnipotence precisely consists: for there may be doubt as to the precise meaning of the word 'all' when we say that God can do all things. If, however, we consider the matter aright, since power is said in reference to possible things, this phrase, "God can do all things," is rightly understood to mean that God can do all things that are possible; and for this reason He is said to be om”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 5a.16: To clarify the matter, the Gemara asks: What is his dilemma? Didn’t one person perform a complete act of lifting and placing? Rav Adda bar Ahava said: His dilemma was with regard to two forces in one person. Rabbi Yoḥanan raised a dilemma with regard to one who performs two separate actions rather than one continuous action. Are two forces in one person considered like one person, and he is liable? Or, perhaps they are considered like two people, and he is exempt? This dilemma remains unresolved and therefore, let it stand.”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 176a.94:13: § Another dilemma was raised by”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 47b.13: § Another dilemma was raised by”