Crude Yet Mildly Effective Philosophical Dialogue

Nick Yang - 1A Math
Posted on: September 24, 2016

“Could God Make a Rock so Heavy that Even He couldn’t Lift it?”

This question (or some similar variation of it) has puzzled philosophers since antiquity. Dubbed the “omnipotence paradox”, it asks if an all-powerful being could nullify its own power. Today it’s used by atheist trolls to “disprove” God. Strawman aside, the question is a very good place to begin to get into philosophical thought – a springboard to exercise our mind’s creativity and ability to rationalize.

The following is not meant to be offensive in any way, and the author apologizes in advance for any temporary or lasting harm done to individuals or himself because of this article.

Assuming God is all powerful and existent, let’s look at some possible answers…

1)      No.

God could not create a rock so heavy that he could not lift it himself since his power level shifts to over nine thousand be just above the most impossible thing. So he would just get strong enough to lift the rock.

2)      Yes.

This is GOD we’re talking about. G-O-D. In other words he can make reality his b*tch even if it makes no sense, because guess what? God created logic, time, concepts, everything. He can do whatever he wants and get away with it, he can get two wieners from his mom while his gray crown-wearing friend only gets one, he can download more ram, click the ads that tell him about hot singles in his area without getting viruses, ANYTHING. Which means he also should be able to bypass the paradox with his power (e.g. he could make it so he is unable and able to lift the rock at the same time), thanks Psycho-pass.

3)      No.

God isn’t immune to logic so in a way his Omnipotence is actually limited. Like how you can’t combine coupons when eating out. God can’t do anything logically impossible because no matter how powerful he is, he cannot overcome the rules of existence.

4)      I dunno?

Some philosophers believe that applying human logic to a divine being is like applying ground hot peppers to a (totally not serious) crotch rash contracted during applied sex ed.


Proponents claim that God is far too divine, good, all-knowing, etc. to really understand anything about him much less what he can and can’t do. We’re better off thinking about more practical useful things like phil-. Never mind.

I’m not going to list any more possibilities. Partially because I can’t think of any more, BUT also because this should have given you a broad enough picture to decide or reason out a more emotionally and/or logically good point. Remember folks: philosophy isn’t about choosing random BS to believe; it’s about making up random BS to believe and refining it in accordance to the principles of logic and evidence, or just failing to do any of that and basing it entirely of off pseudo-scientific dogma so you can jack off to how superior and enlightened you are cough-Richard Dawkins-cough.  Join us next issue where we’ll examine different ethical theories and their strengths and weaknesses. Until then please send your angry emails suggestions to