CHRISTIANS: can god create a rock so large that even he can't lift it? (PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE READ MORE)?

Question

please read ALL of what i wrote before you answer.

this question has been asked many times on this forum, and for every single one, like 80 % of the answers read "of course, he's god". and the thing that a lot of you probably don't even notice is that for every one of you who says "yes, of course he can, he's god", there's another one of you who's saying "no, of course not, he's god". it's like half of you are reading the first part of the sentence, and the other half are reading the ending.

well, PLEASE READ THE WHOLE THING THIS TIME.

if you say "NO", then you're saying that there's a rock too big for god to create.

if you say "YES", then you're saying that there is a size of rock too big for god to lift.

either way then, there's something god can't do. so anyone who answer's this question with "yes" or "no" is insulting god.

now i have seen other answers to this question. that's good. that's what i want to encourage. i'm hoping that everyone who reads this, leaves an answer.

Answer 1

The purpose of the question is to demonstrate the inherent contradiction in the word "omnipotent". Similar questions can be asked of the other "omni" words. If you accept the typical description of an omni^3 god, you are compelled to accept the actual existence of contradictions.

Answer 2

To further what Kimpossibrr was saying about the idea of a rock, we get back to Plato's Theory of Forms. I'll demonstrate by asking another question (though a much sillier one) like "Can God create a cat wth wings?" The natural state of a cat is to be without wings (clearly). If a cat had wings, it would not still be a cat, but another creature completely. Thus, no, God could not create a cat with wings because it would no longer be a cat when it was created. Therefore, if we look at what the form of a rock would be, it is clear that in the same logical manner, God could not create a rock so big he couldn't life it or it would no longer be a rock.
The easiest way to think it through is that God put certain laws into effect upon the creation of the universe. Things such as physics. And while he can interject something abnormal within these laws that would not naturally occur, he would also not break the laws he himself put into existence. Breaking such laws would be contradictory to his very nature, just as Kimpossibrr said that lying would be.
C.S. Lewis' book "Miracles" goes into this very theme and studies the ideas of natural law and miracles and the relation thereof in a very in depth scholarly way. I would highly reccommend it.

Answer 3

The problem is that you are discussing an impossible event and applying it to a superhuman entity. A similar question is: Can God create a square circle?

When dealing with something as unfathomable as a deity, a question like that just doesn't apply. It is an impossible statement within the realm of omnipotence.

But I can agree with you that it is insulting to God (or whoever) to simply say yes or no. When someone is so infatuated with his religion that his answer is a mindless "yes," when asked a question that begins with, "Can God do…" then he has demonstrated a lack of critical thinking.

But then, that's really the answerer insulting himself and letting his ignorance show. I'm not sure it is insulting to God. Something that powerful probably isn't insulted easily, though some religious zealots seem to think God can't handle not being shoved in people's faces. I'm sure God would understand.

Answer 4

Actually here is the answer to your question. The question in and of it self is a logical fallacy. It’s call denying the antecedent.

Can god create a rock so large that he can’t even lift it?

Premise A: In order for god to be god then god must be able to do all things.
Premise B: God can create a really huge rock
Premise C: There is a rock god can’t lift.

Premise C violates Premise A therefore your question is meaningless.

In other words.

If A then B
If B then C
If C then Not A

Answer 5

This is in response to a similiar question that was posed, then removed right as I was about to submit an answer.

Questions like this are, in my view, legitimate questions to be asked by not only atheists but believers as well. What good does it do to say 'I believe in god' if you cannot define what the properties of 'god' are? I could say- I believe in 'grampsnspeels', and the first question out of your mouth SHOULD be "what the heck is a 'grampsnspeel'?? If I cannot define what I mean by grampsnspeel, it is basically a meaningless statement to say that I believe in these beings.

Obviously, with the several thousand religions out there, there must be many definitions of 'god', and most likely the person sitting next to you in church on sunday has a different definition of 'god' than you do. Maybe not, but how would you ever know if you don't ask questions? It may be enough for you to say 'god is what god is'. If that's all you need to know for yourself, so be it. I would think that the thinking religious person would want to understand what she believes in, and what is more fundamental to understanding than defining the properies of the 'god' you worship?

Concerning the 'Can God create a rock big enough that he can't pick it up' question in particular, the answer to that question is VERY important to an understanding of 'god'. The conclusion implicit in your answer to this is that 'god' cannot circumvent the laws of logic, she is bound to them. But why should an all-powerful 'god' be constrained by the very laws she created? This seems to me to be analagous playing myself at a board game,
and not being able to cheat. Why can't I move my pawn 3 spaces to capture the queen? Yes, it violate the 'rules', but who cares? What sense would it make if I were physically unable to move the pawn 3 spaces?

So hopefully I have illustrated that questions like these do have very serious philisophical and theological implications, regardless of the motivation of the person asking the question!

Answer 6

I am not going to say yes or no. God could make a rock as big that he can't hold it anymore. God could pick up any rock in the world ( or anywhere else) God is unexplainable. He will tell you when you get to Heaven the true answer. God can do anything. He doesn't have a body like we do so he doesn't have to pick up rocks. He could just tell the waves to or something. Good Luck!

Answer 7

Kimpossibrr actually has a very good point, and I tend to agree. But, at the same time we have to understand that everything we know and even imagine is based upon our material world and our five senses. God goes way beyond that. If God is omnipotent, then by definition he can do everything. He can make a "rock" to bit for him to lift, and at the same time he can lift it. How can He do such a thing since it is illogical and contridictory? . . . Only He can answer that. Based on our experiance it is impossible, but He is God and nothing is impossible for Him; therefore, He can do it without violating his nature.

Answer 8

The boundaries that God places for humanity, can not and will not ever bound God.

Your question tries to place God in the limitation of the human person or mind. This is a lack of knowledge of an infinite God.

God is Everything, in Everything, of Everything. Can God lift himself?

God is your Question. He is the first action, movement in the history of the universe. For every action there is a reaction. God is this first action. God is the Rock and can lift Himself because He is ALL things.

Answer 9

Yeshua pronounced guy might desire to pass mountains. What extra of God? I are conscious of it quite is a philosophical question approximately all-powerful good judgment, yet imo it quite is working from a perspective or perspective of a God it quite is extensively in reaction to literalism from the proper religions. in certainty God does not create something anymore, God is in relax - b-e-i-n-g - solidarity and is in all issues and all issues is interior of God. God set the "rules" which might deliver the alpha of lack of expertise to the omega ending touch. those rules take priority over something, those rules pass issues, shape issues and is the solidarity that "God" a minimum of this point performed. And those "actual" rules are purely an holographic trend of even extra advantageous rules. possibly those extra advantageous rules are God's stability? possibly even the rock has or represents a part of expertise? possibly even a rock isn't actually a rock, yet many times empty, a part of an ether of expertise? possibly there is not any difference from the heavy to the sunshine besides what it represents in length in the innovations? yet to respond to the question from the situation that it grew to become into posed. sure it quite is a God it quite is self proscribing, he does no longer create a rock extra advantageous then himself yet whilst he can't then he's not all-powerful. certainty learn possibly he's the rock, if the rock grew to become into created, it would be a part of innovations, a vibration of thought in expertise.

Answer 10

Yes, of course He can. He's created thousands of them. They're called "planets". He cannot lift them because they are in an environment which is contradictory to the term. There is no "up" and "down" in space. Thus, nothing can be lifted. However, He could move them if He so chose.

P.S. Way to cut and paste from www.carm.org/questions/rock.htm, kim... your thoughts are what the asker is looking for, not some textbook answer she could google. Why not tell us all what you think about her question?