What the heck does omnipotence mean anyway?

Great Debates
1

In another thread, that I am starting to cool down about, so I may go back, APB said:

Some paradoxes do have some interesting things to say. Others don’t. In the case of God, typically the paradoxes don’t, in my opinion anyway. Your mileage may vary.

Granted there is an issue of interpretation here. What is omnipotence anyway?

I look at it this way (using set theory sort of).

Imagine the following:

Set of knowables = {k1…kN} (boy I hope those brackets show up, if not there are supposed to be curly brackets there)

Set of doables = {do1…doN}

Set of describeables (is that even a word?) = {de1…deN}

Omnisciences is knowing everything in the set of knowables.

Omnipotence is being able to do everything in the set of doables.

“can do anything” is the set of describables.

So, is “create any possible universe” in the set of doables? I think so, after all, it is any possible universe.

If you take omnipotence as being a very large subset but not the entire set of doables then I think you are justified in saying that the step is flawed.

So, then am I justified in this? Well omnipotence is “all”, potence = potency (according to the M-W dictionary), potency = the ability or capacity to achieve or bring about a particular result (according to M-W dictionary). So we have:

“all” + “the ability or capacity to achieve of bring about a particular result”

Heck that almost sounds like all describables :), but I think it clearly at least is all doables.

Do you agree?

“Glitch … Window, large icons.” - Bob the Guardian

2

Omnipotence means you can create a rock so heavy that you can’t lift it. Or it means that you can’t create such a rock. I forget which.

3

In my opinion, meaningful omnipotence is the ability to do anything that can be done. The notion of doing something that can’t be done is absurd, as I see it. The set of what can be done will differ, depending on circumstance. What God can do, as I understand it, is the universal set of what can be done. Part of that set we can do, too. The rest of it, we can’t.

4

Hooray! Somebody agrees with me! I feel much better now. Thank you Lib, you made my day.

5

I guess I should say too that meaningful omniscience is knowing what can be known. In my opinion, I mean.

(I know this is awkward folks, but it’ll smooth out with practice.)

6

Hey, Lib and Glitch agree!! David, you said you wanted proof of a miracle? :rolleyes:

7

Okay, Glitch, you win. I’m probably just disagreeing in the semantics. I don’t think it’s a major point, really, kind of a side issue to that other thread.

BTW, MW defines omnipotent (primary meaning) as “ALMIGHTY”. Okay, great. We turn to the As.
almighty **1.**often cap: having absolute power over all <Almighty God>
That’s not a real solid basis to decide the point here. Let’s check “powerful” and “all”.

powerful 1: having great power, prestige, or influence

sigh. Okay…

power 1.a (1): ability to act or produce an effect (2): ability to get extra base hits

Alright, I’m sure God’s batting average is well into the .300s. How about “all”?

all 1. a : the whole amount or quantity of

Terrific. So “omnipotent” would seem to mean, according to MW, “having all the power that exists”. I don’t think either one of us wanted that sense, so the dictionary does not really give us an easy answer. I should mention that I’ve looked only at the primary definitions here; “all” has eight (as an adjective), “powerful” has two (as an adjective), “power” has nine (as a noun), and “omnipotent” itself has three as an adjective and two as a noun (one of which is “GOD”). There are a lot of possible combinations of these definitions, and I’m sure we can use the word in a very wide variety of ways without going outside this particular authority. I’m sure the OED has, if anything, even more possible combinations.

The definition we are using for “omnipotent” probably should be hashed out first next time, since obviously usage may legitimately vary.

8

From Merriam-Webster Online:

Main Entry: om·nip·o·tence
Pronunciation: <tt>äm-'ni-p&-t&n(t)s</tt>
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : the quality or state of being omnipotent
2 : an agency or force of unlimited power

Main Entry: [sup]1[/sup]om·nip·o·tent
Pronunciation: <tt>-t&nt</tt>
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin *omnipotent-,
omnipotens, *from *omni- + potent-, potens *potent
Date: 14th century
1 often capitalized **: <font size=-1>ALMIGHTY</font>**1
2 : having virtually unlimited authority or influence
3 obsolete : <font size=-1><a href=“dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=arrant”>ARRANT</a></font>

  • om·nip·o·tent·ly adverb

Main Entry: [sup]2[/sup]omnipotent
Function: noun
Date: 1600
1 : one who is omnipotent
2 capitalized **: <font size=-1>GOD</font>**1

Yer pal,
Satan

9

I certainly do think definitions are helpful, but definitions are developed from how we use words. Respectfully, it isn’t the other way around.

If we specify what we mean by a “meaningful omnipotence”, then it seems fair that we are simply trying to clarify the connotations and other nuances of meaning that definitions in and of themselves are not complete enough to express.

I don’t mean that we should be reckless with our vocabulary, but I don’t think there is anything wrong with trying to bring a precision to bear on a concept that would otherwise be vague.

10

Generally speaking, omnipotence is the ability to do anything that is doable. The idea that an omnipotent being could do impossible things is rare, but has some precedance as well(see Descartes Meditations). However this tends to create all sorts of problems, naturally, so it’s not an awfully popular position.

11

Omnimpotence is complete and utter inability to engage in sexual intercourse.

Or omnipotence is the ability to do anything.

12

How in hell does a camel go through the eye of a needle?

There’s always another beer.

13

And how the heck do those deer know that they’re supposed to cross at those deer crossing signs? :wink:

14

They have deer crossing guards.