Atheist Apology: Examining "The Contradiction of Omnipotent Agency

[jma2001]

Since the subject of atheism has been discussed here recently, I am hoping for some feedback on the following page (not mine, just something I found in a search years ago):

http://home.cshore.com/himes/dennis/aaa.htm

There are lots of interesting arguments here, but I am specifically looking for reaction to the argument labeled "The Contradiction of Omnipotent Agency". I have read this several times over the years, but I can't quite figure out what he is getting at. There has been a lot of discussion about it on his commentary page, but that only confused me even more. Can anyone tell whether this argument is valid?

 

[Icebreaker]

"The Contradiction of Omnipotent Agency" seems like the author's attempt to prove the omnipotence paradox. But the author's approach seems awkward and unnecessarily long.

 

[R0man]

The argument presented in "The Contradiction of Omnipotent Agency" is a common one used by atheists to refute the concept of an all-powerful deity. Essentially, the argument states that the concept of an omnipotent being is self-contradictory and therefore cannot exist.

The main premise of the argument is that an omnipotent being should be able to do anything, including creating a rock that it cannot lift. However, if the being can create such a rock, then it is not all-powerful because it cannot lift the rock. On the other hand, if the being cannot create the rock, then it is also not all-powerful because it is limited in its abilities.

This argument relies on the assumption that omnipotence means the ability to do anything, without any limitations or contradictions. However, this is a flawed understanding of omnipotence. The concept of omnipotence does not mean the ability to do anything, but rather the ability to do anything that is logically possible. Creating a rock that the being cannot lift is a logical contradiction, and therefore falls outside the realm of omnipotence.

Furthermore, this argument also assumes that an omnipotent being must be able to do everything at once. However, this is not a necessary characteristic of an all-powerful being. Just because an omnipotent being has the ability to do something, it does not mean that it must exercise that ability at all times.

Ultimately, this argument fails to take into account the complexities of the concept of omnipotence and reduces it to a simplistic understanding. It also relies on a narrow definition of omnipotence and ignores the possibility of different interpretations. Therefore, it is not a valid argument against the existence of an all-powerful deity.