let God choose what God chooses to choose
by Jonathan
There is a paradox concerning a commonly asserted maxim for God – omnipotence – which asks, can God create a rock too heavy for God to lift? This is an interesting question, for if God can, then God is not powerful to lift. But if God cannot, then God is not powerful to create. All of the sudden a maxim that seemed to have exalted God to the fullest has been clouded and causes confusion. The first, and most obvious, problem of this paradox is its materialistic assumptions. If I were to attempt an answer to this question, I would focus on one main concern and from there examine the implications of either response.
My main concern is God’s character, and how we address this divine character semantically. I first confess that my statements of God do not determine God’s character (thus, if I inappropriately deal with this question, God is not changed I have rather just misunderstood God), consequently I hope to do as little with my words to determine God’s character but to give reverence and respect to God’s identity. This largely affects how I would deal with this paradox. How does our answer confine God? and is such confinement appropriate?
If I cannot and should not attempt to determine and ‘confine’ God’s character by my statements, the only appropriate answer to this question is that God does whichever God determines for God’s self to do. If God chooses to create a rock too heavy, then God can do so; if God determines to lift all rocks, then God will not create a rock too heavy. Consequently, I would first claim that God can create a rock too heavy; for sequentially, this gives God the choice that God is limited. Although, I must confess, God’s choice does not seem appropriately limited by sequence, so God must be equally free to choose to be able to lift all rocks (despite size and weight). This is a possible free-choice of God.
One thing I most appreciate about this paradox (and most paradoxes concerning God’s omni-ness) is that it points to God’s limitation. How is God limited? I claim God’s limitation is only a self-limitation, thus God is a free-choosing, free-acting agent. Where God is limited, God has chosen to be limited in and through such means. We must accept, I believe, God’s self-limitation for several reasons:
First, these types of paradoxes point out the inherent limitation of agency.
Second, and this is a related concept to the first, God is a free-acting agent who acts within topological time (and I would argue also metrical time) [1]. If God is to act at all, God is to limit God’s self from other actions. If God chooses to create the universe that God created, then God can never be the one who did not create said universe. God could destroy it, but God will thenceforth always have created. Simply put: God acts and, by nature of activity, God limits God’s self. Though it sounds counter-intuitive to say that God is at all limited, it seems that if God has any freedom then God is limited [2].
Therefore, my response to this paradox is that God determines for God’s self whether or not God can do such a thing. If God is a free-acting agent, then neither limitation is threatening to God’s divinity and power for God is by nature of being an acting agent limited in choosing. Otherwise, we neglect God’s ability to choose, and God is less free (and consequently less powerful).
__________________
[1] The difference between ‘topological’ and ‘metrical’ time is: topological time is concerned with the ordering of events, chronology, mere sequence. Metrical time is concerned with duration and ‘interval scaling’. It is clear (or should be clear) that God exists in topological time, as any free-acting agent chooses in sequence, and activities can be discerned through cause and effect type relationships. It would be less widely accepted that God acts within metrical time as metrical time relies on laws of nature and external points of reference that allow for measurement and interval analysis (for us, the sun provides such a point of reference, but since God pre-exists the sun and all created matter, God has no external point of reference for metrical time). I suppose an argument could be made that God, as Trinity, is God’s own point of reference by which God can measure time metrically. I contend that the type of activities that God participates in with the created world and its inhabitants demonstrate that God acts within metrical time as well, but for the above argument, this matter is of tangential concern.
[2] It cannot even be argued that God could never be limited if God chose not to act, for the same argument as I outlined for creation applies. God will thenceforth be the one who chose not to act at such-and-such a point in the topological sequence of time.
But what about other paradoxes? You claim that God’s only limitations are self-imposed, but isn’t logical possibility an external limitation? (i.e. Can God kill Santa Claus?/Can God make a square circle?)
Actually Kevin, my main point is that God is already limited logically (by nature of being a free-acting agent). The point of this concept of ‘self-limitation’ is that God chooses how this limits God’s self. God freely (and in a way somewhat akin to Nietzsche’s concept of Will to Power) chooses God’s actions and thus chooses the manifestation of God’s limitations.
As for the other paradoxes (especially the two you mentioned), I consider them to be of different classification and consequently pertaining to different arguments. The paradox of the rock is not a logical contradiction within itself (for a person could create/build something too heavy for them to lift). It is only illogical when juxtaposed against the maxim of omnipotence. On the other hand, Santa Claus does not exist (especially as we conceive Santa Claus, as Michelson pointed out below), to kill something that doesn’t exist does not even make sense as a statement within itself. The square circle experiment is as well nonsensical within itself, a product of linguistics. To deal with that, we must partially deal with questions concerning God’s thought-process. Does God think in linguistic modes? It seems that only within a linguistic world could such a string of concepts be collected to allow a nonsensical logical contradiction as presented.
But again, my point is not to say that God’s limitations are only self-imposed, but that God freely chooses (as freely as is possible) God’s own path through these limitations.
Fair enough.
If God did kill (and I don’t know that I want God to kill or hope that God kills) – but, if God kills, God should kill the western notion of capitalistic Santa Claus.
Kevin,
The existence of some ‘other’ than God is or results from a God-act and so a limiting act.
Jon,
Would you say that God’s participation in topological time is also a self-limiting quality? Would it be a contradiction for God to operate outside topological time and be a self-limiting free agent?
Marty,
I agree, but only after I get to buy the really shiny new “whatever it is” that I want : )
Tyler, I would not necessarily assert (at least not yet, without further thought) that God’s participation in topological time is strictly a self-limiting act/quality. Mostly, I would claim that how God exists in topological time is as freely as is possible, and most capable of free-agency toward this limitation. So that, as I responded to Kevin at the exact time as you responded, God chooses – for God’s self – how this limits God.
Also, by the way I defined topological time, it is not possible to ‘operate’ outside it. For operation insinuates sequence/process, which is the only qualification for topological time. It might be possible for God to operate outside metrical time and still be a free-agent; though this only makes sense in pre-creation conversation, for how could there be metrical points of reference and God not also conceive/perceive the passing of events in conjunction with such? If we then can calculate and articulate duration and interval based on a constant (the speed of light or the position of the sun) is not God also capable of understanding this metric? Can God now be isolated from the creation which has allowed for metrical progression (without removing this very creation from existence)?
This last question is part of the idea, which you pointed Kevin back toward, of the way that God’s very activity (especially in creating) is self-limiting.
Jonathan,
A very interesting read. Not being a theology student nor a deep-thinker, I consider the greatest paradox to be how much of God’s infinite wisdom is in the grasp of my finite mind.
Thanks for reading, Aunt Connie!
[...] chooses to choose [revisited] by Jonathan on 03.29.2010 Upon reading a few comments on this former post, and giving my own writing a subsequent reexamination, I realized an overstatement that I made, [...]