A Finite God and Omnipotence

[Divine Insight]

Can it be said that a finite God could be omnipotent?

I've heard many arguments that an omnipotent God is logically impossible because there could be no such thing as a God who could make an object so heavy that even he couldn't lift it.

But that assumes that God is infinite in what it can do.

What if a God is finite in what it can do? Could it still be said to be omnipotent?

I think it could be said to be omnipotent within this context.

Let's say that all possible things that can be done are indeed finite. That might be hard to imagine, but for the sake of argument let's assume this to be true.

If this is the case, and a God can do every possible thing in that finite set of possibilities, then wouldn't it be fair to say that this God is "omnipotent" in this context?

After all, if God can do everything that is possible to do then God could be said to be omnipotent in that situation. The fact that we can describe things that are impossible (like making an object too heavy to lift) wouldn't apply if that specific possibility simply doesn't exist within the finite set of possibilities.

In other words, the saying "With God all things are possible", could simply mean that, with God, everything that is contained within the set of possibilities are possible. If something is not in this finite set, then it's simply not within the realm of possibility.

In fact, if we look at this from a human point of view we can see why it would make sense to say that with God all things are possible.

Imagine that all possible things are finite in scope. However, within that finite set, humans on their own, can only do a small subset of those possibilities. Not only now, before forever. They will always be restricted to a small subset of what's possible no matter how technologically advanced they become.

But if God can do everything that's possible (albeit a finite number of things) then it still makes sense to say that "With God all things are possible". Because in this context it simply means that if anything is possible then God can do it. And if it's not possible to do then it's just not in the set of possibilities at all.

In other words, there is nothing within the set of possibilities that God can't do.

Therefore, in this context it makes sense to say that this God is "omnipotent" because God can do anything that's possible to do. And if something is impossible (like God making an object too heavy that even he can't lift it) then that's just not in the set of things that are possible in reality.

It seems to me that it would make sense to say that this God is "omnipotent" in this given context. This God can do everything that's possible to do. That's pretty omnipotent right there.

[Hamsaka]

Can it be said that a finite God could be omnipotent?

I've heard many arguments that an omnipotent God is logically impossible because there could be no such thing as a God who could make an object so heavy that even he couldn't lift it.

But that assumes that God is infinite in what it can do.

What if a God is finite in what it can do? Could it still be said to be omnipotent?

I think it could be said to be omnipotent within this context.

This brings to mind the God of the Mormons, a finite being who was once a very holy human man, now with divine authority for his own world.

Let's say that all possible things that can be done are indeed finite. That might be hard to imagine, but for the sake of argument let's assume this to be true.

If this is the case, and a God can do every possible thing in that finite set of possibilities, then wouldn't it be fair to say that this God is "omnipotent" in this context?

Conceded. Still fits with the God of the Mormons, too, as claimed by believers.

After all, if God can do everything that is possible to do then God could be said to be omnipotent in that situation. The fact that we can describe things that are impossible (like making an object too heavy to lift) wouldn't apply if that specific possibility simply doesn't exist within the finite set of possibilities.

In other words, the saying "With God all things are possible", could simply mean that, with God, everything that is contained within the set of possibilities are possible. If something is not in this finite set, then it's simply not within the realm of possibility.

In fact, if we look at this from a human point of view we can see why it would make sense to say that with God all things are possible.

Imagine that all possible things are finite in scope. However, within that finite set, humans on their own, can only do a small subset of those possibilities. Not only now, before forever. They will always be restricted to a small subset of what's possible no matter how technologically advanced they become.

But if God can do everything that's possible (albeit a finite number of things) then it still makes sense to say that "With God all things are possible". Because in this context it simply means that if anything is possible then God can do it. And if it's not possible to do then it's just not in the set of possibilities at all.

In other words, there is nothing within the set of possibilities that God can't do.

Therefore, in this context it makes sense to say that this God is "omnipotent" because God can do anything that's possible to do. And if something is impossible (like God making an object too heavy that even he can't lift it) then that's just not in the set of things that are possible in reality.

It seems to me that it would make sense to say that this God is "omnipotent" in this given context. This God can do everything that's possible to do. That's pretty omnipotent right there.

From what little I understand of Mormonism, the "God" you have described the condition of, could be said to have the clearest, most concise, most accurately represented and coherent God as compared to the infinite impersonal Allah or the omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent Christian God.

[Divine Insight]

All I've done is suggest that a God entity that could be finite and still qualify as being omnipotent within that situation.

I would imagine this could fit any God myth. I don't think there's anything in Christianity or Islam that demands that God cannot be finite. Because as I've argued in the OP finite does not equate to being restricted in any way. In fact, the Abrahamic religions claim that God is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Therefore, this God must be finite because infinity has no beginning or end.

[agnosticatheist]

All I've done is suggest that a God entity that could be finite and still qualify as being omnipotent within that situation.

I would imagine this could fit any God myth. I don't think there's anything in Christianity or Islam that demands that God cannot be finite. Because as I've argued in the OP finite does not equate to being restricted in any way. In fact, the Abrahamic religions claim that God is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Therefore, this God must be finite because infinity has no beginning or end.

But...Wait...Don't they also claim that God is eternal? And doesn't the Bible also claim that God is eternal?

[Divine Insight]

All I've done is suggest that a God entity that could be finite and still qualify as being omnipotent within that situation.

I would imagine this could fit any God myth. I don't think there's anything in Christianity or Islam that demands that God cannot be finite. Because as I've argued in the OP finite does not equate to being restricted in any way. In fact, the Abrahamic religions claim that God is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Therefore, this God must be finite because infinity has no beginning or end.

But...Wait...Don't they also claim that God is eternal? And doesn't the Bible also claim that God is eternal?

Eternal isn't necessarily the same as infinite. It would only be the same if you require that time is linear and runs from an infinite past into an infinite future. With infinitely many individual "nows". But time doesn't need to be like that. Time could simply be an ever-changing "now". And that wouldn't be the same as infinitely many individual things. It would only be one thing that dynamically changes.

So an eternity is not the same thing as infinitely many things.

Think of it as a "closed loop".

The same moments being reused in different ways.

In other words, does the circumference of a circle need to be infinitely long? If not, then a close loop of time would not need to be infinitely long either, yet it would still be "eternal" due to its closed-loop nature. It has no beginning or end. It just keep looping back on itself eternally.

[Goat]

All I've done is suggest that a God entity that could be finite and still qualify as being omnipotent within that situation.

I would imagine this could fit any God myth. I don't think there's anything in Christianity or Islam that demands that God cannot be finite. Because as I've argued in the OP finite does not equate to being restricted in any way. In fact, the Abrahamic religions claim that God is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Therefore, this God must be finite because infinity has no beginning or end.

But...Wait...Don't they also claim that God is eternal? And doesn't the Bible also claim that God is eternal?

When it comes to the word 'eternal', I will point out that the meaning of words change, and to the ancient Hebrews, 'eternal' was not infinite, but merely a very very long time. When meanings and concepts change over time, things can turn into contradictions.

[usassociatesllc@hotmail.c]

It is claimed that the God of the bible is omnipotent (all-powerful), omnipresent (in all places at the same time), omniscient (He knows everything).

This concept about God is not true, the Bible uses terms to help us see the correct picture about God.

Whenever we speak we use words that is all inclusive. But even in our statements the word “all� does not mean without exception. In the other sentence I used the word ‘we’ that doesn’t include everyone on the planet or everyone who ever existed. There are scriptures that say ‘all’ but it has exceptions. Just because we cannot see the top of something doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a top. The Bible says “With God, all things are possible.� It is unfathomable for “all things to be possible�, but that is only part of the picture. The bible clearly paints limits for God, which clarifies the word ‘all’ in that scripture. The Bible says God cannot lie, die, be tempted by evil. These are limits that indicate a top, crest, or peak of God’s ability. So the word Omnipotent could not apply to God. Some religious leaders claim that God is omnipresent or everywhere, all places, at the same time. This is a mind-blowing concept that could be applied to God. Nevertheless, once again the scripture provide a clearer picture of limits. The terminology the Bible uses about God would be incorrect if God is everywhere. The Bible calls the heavens, his place of dwelling. You cannot dwell somewhere if you are everywhere. Also this goes against what the Bible says about idol worship. God forbids idol worship even calling them dead, senseless, and lifeless. But if he is in the idol they are not lifeless. Can God be in Satan, in death, in excrement? If the answer is no in any sense then the concept of omnipresence is incorrect. Now here is the big one, the one everyone says about God as true. God is Omniscience, or knows everything. Fate. This concept is beyond comprehension. That would mean that God NEVER changes his mind. Nevertheless, many places in the Bible it says that God had regret, he repented, reconsidered, and God said if certain things did happen he threatened to change his mind, he would forget wrongdoings. Clearly the concept of fate and omniscience do not apply to God. The problem is not peoples concept of God, but a complete picture of God. Just because God has limits does not take away from his greatness. In fact it adds to it. When making determinations we need to look at the whole picture and not one or two scriptures. If you would like the references, I can provide them.

[Divine Insight]

Now here is the big one, the one everyone says about God as true. God is Omniscience, or knows everything. Fate. This concept is beyond comprehension. That would mean that God NEVER changes his mind. Nevertheless, many places in the Bible it says that God had regret, he repented, reconsidered, and God said if certain things did happen he threatened to change his mind, he would forget wrongdoings. Clearly the concept of fate and omniscience do not apply to God.

That's one conclusion from the perspective of someone who would like to believe these fables are true.

However, the conclusion that the Biblical fables are simply extremely self-contradictory and highly absurd superstitions is actually far more reasonable.

As you have pointed out, the Bible itself has God repenting things like even having created man when he had to drown them all out in a flood. This who is not only not omniscient, but it would also be a God who has no plan, and no clue how to properly raise his pet humans.

So the conclusion that the Bible is nothing more than a very poorly written superstitious fairy tale is truly the only rational conclusion that can be had.

Any attempt to try to support these fables as actually describing a real God is futile.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 8 by Divine Insight]

"So the conclusion that the Bible is nothing more than a very poorly written superstitious fairy tale is truly the only rational conclusion that can be had."

I know...! That's exactly what I thought when I had to learn the alphabet.

[usassociatesllc@hotmail.c]

Just because God does not have infinite knowledge, does not mean he does not exist. I think what is needed to first be determined is 'do you believe the Bible'?
You use the word fables to indicate made up stories.

You need to look at evidence.

Evolution or Creation.

There is no experiment that can be performed to prove Creation false.
Why? Because in every experiment the one performing the test represents an intelligent mind. So the scientist would represent God. Evolution would only be correct if it was happening all the time. The fact it has not happened in millions of years proves there was a cause. That cause is God.

Is the Bible from God.

If I put five different people in different rooms with different back grounds and asked them to write the same fictitious story and have it line up chronologically to each other, what would I get? It is impossible to have them write the same story.
Take those same five people and tell them to relate the truth of an event they had in common. Then things will line up. Now think about the Bible, the background of these writers are diverse to say the least. Some were farmers, fishermen, shepherds, prophets, judges, kings, physicians, court officials, hunters, accountants, slaves, singers, young men, older men, you name they had it. Forty men wrote a chronological story that not only lines up with history, geography, and science, it has proven itself true against just about every test man has made to disprove it. No other book can make that claim. But that is what we could expect from a book that is actually from God.

People who make claims that the Bible is a fable, fairy tale, or superstitious, are the one who have not studied the tests the Bible has undergone and passed. These people make statements without study. It is easy to make claims without proof. Without evidence our claims and conclusions are only guesses. I find that each generation attacks the claims and conclusions of the previous generation without studying or researching why that generation came to their conclusion. By claiming everyone is guessing it adds strength to their own conclusions, and encourages others not try.

Does it matter what you believe in life?

If your answer is no.

Then there is no need to debate any conclusion, for we are all true.

But if your answer is yes.

Then you need to study the tests the Bible has passed.
Because the bible is the truest book to ever exist.