“Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it?” Yes, I know we’ve all heard that line from some stoner friend who think he is being deep.
And until recently, I for one did not know there was a specific name for this type of argument. Well, now I know, and because I’m bored, I’m also sharing…
The omnipotence paradox refers to various paradoxical situations regarding the abilities of an omnipotent being – i.e., God – which might undermine such a being’s omnipotence.
Basically it is any question, which no matter the answer, the end result is the same. That being a limit on the power of the deity or being being questioned. However, the paradox represents a logical fallacy known as reductio ad absurdum, with the conclusion that a truly omnipotent being cannot exist.
While using this type of argument may be fun and may make for a good one-liner, to use is in any serious debate is wrong, since it represents a logical fallacy, as can be seen here:
If the paradox is reworded slightly to the common variant of “what happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable object?” then we can clearly spot a contradiction in the paradox itself, a similar problem to creating a four sided triangle as mentioned above. Namely, that if there is an unstoppable force, then there is no unmovable object, as if there was an unmovable object, there could be no unstoppable force. The two are therefore mutually exclusive in existence, and it is a logical contradiction for both to exist at the same time.
And to end with a joke: