Omnipotence Paradox

What is the Omnipotence Paradox?

The Omnipotence Paradox is like a challenging puzzle about the idea of being all-powerful. Imagine someone can do absolutely anything, like the God in many religions. Now, ask this question: can this all-powerful person make a object so big and heavy that they can’t lift it themselves? If they can make such a object, it seems they aren’t all-powerful after all because they can’t lift it. But if they can’t make it, then there’s still something they can’t do, which means they aren’t all-powerful either. This question doesn’t just confuse us; it also shows a problem with the idea of being able to do anything – it seems like a contradiction.

First, think of “omnipotence” as having unlimited power, being able to do any and everything. The paradox, or the confusing part, comes in when we think of a task that challenges this power – creating a object so massive that the omnipotent being itself can’t move it. This task is a test: if the being can do anything, they should be able to create the object. But being unable to lift it shows a limit, which goes against the very idea of “unlimited power.” On the flip side, if the being can’t make the heavy object, that’s also a limit. So, either way, the idea of “unlimited power” doesn’t quite work out.


The origin of the Paradox of the Omnipotent Being can be traced back to medieval philosophers and theologians who wrestled with the concept of God’s omnipotence. One variation of this paradox is present in the writings of the 12th-century philosopher Averroes, and it was later developed by Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century. These thinkers were trying to make sense of the extent of God’s abilities without contradicting the definition of Him as an all-powerful being.


  • A person claims they can eat any amount of food. Asking them if they can eat endless food until there is no food left in the world makes us question their claim. They either can’t eat all the food (showing a limit) or they can eat endlessly (which is impossible and shows that the claim was too broad).
  • A kid boasts about being able to hold their breath forever. To test this, you might ask if they can hold their breath and never need to breathe again. It’s either not true, or if they actually could, they wouldn’t be human as we understand humans to be because all humans need to breathe.
  • Someone says they can lift anything, no matter how heavy. Now, if we create a weight that keeps getting heavier the more they lift it, we’re stuck. They can’t lift this ever-increasing weight, so they’re not limitless in strength, or the task itself is impossible.

Key Arguments

  • The paradox challenges the coherence of omnipotence by posing a task that seems to defy the very concept of unlimited power.
  • If an omnipotent being can perform the logically impossible, then creating a stone too heavy for it to lift should be feasible. However, if this is possible, then the being’s inability to lift the stone is a power limitation.
  • A response to the paradox suggests redefining omnipotence to exclude the ability to perform logically contradictory actions.
  • The paradox could be seen as defining a limitation not on power but paradoxically on how we understand power and logic when applied to a supremely omnipotent being.

Answer or Resolution

There have been several attempts to answer or resolve the Paradox of the Omnipotent Being. Some philosophers argue that the act of creating a stone so heavy that an omnipotent being can’t lift it is a logically incoherent task—it doesn’t make sense, like asking for a square circle. They suggest that omnipotence should be defined as the power to do anything that’s logically possible. Therefore, an omnipotent being wouldn’t need to perform logically impossible actions to be considered all-powerful.

Others have proposed that the paradox is rooted in a misuse of language and that asking whether God can create a stone He cannot lift is similar to asking if He can create a married bachelor. Such questions, they claim, form meaningless tasks as they are self-contradictory and don’t actually describe any true action or state of affairs.

Why is it Important?

Thinking about the Omnipotence Paradox matters because it shows how we understand power and logic. When we hit limits in our thinking, like this paradox, it helps us to think harder and better about big ideas like freedom, control, and what we mean by ‘can do anything.’ Questions like these are used in many discussions, not just about God, but also about our laws, what we believe is possible, and how we live our lives. For average people, it challenges us to question our beliefs and the way we understand the world we live in, making us wiser and more thoughtful individuals.

Practical Applications

While the this paradox might seem like a purely theoretical exercise, it does have practical applications, especially in the realm of religion, philosophy, and ethics.

  • In theology, the paradox is used to explore and discuss the nature of God or gods, particularly in terms of how divine attributes like omnipotence should be interpreted and understood.
  • In philosophy, it serves as a classic example of a logical paradox, prompting reflection on the nature and limits of logic. It also encourages rich discussions around the concept of omnipotence and its place in metaphysical debates.
  • In ethics, contemplating the limits of power, be it divine or human, can influence how we consider moral responsibility, especially when discussing the actions of those in positions of authority.

Even though the paradox may not have a direct “real-world” impact, grappling with its implications can shape our views on leadership, responsibility, and the nature of power. Moreover, discussions around the paradox can help refine critical thinking skills and philosophical reasoning.

Major Criticism

One major criticism of the proposed resolutions to the paradox is that they seem to limit omnipotence by making it subject to the laws of logic. Critics argue that this suggests logic is a higher principle than the omnipotent being itself, which is contrary to some religious beliefs that position God as the ultimate authority, above all laws, including logic.

Another criticism is that applying human concepts of logic and language to an omnipotent being is inherently flawed. Our understanding of abilities, limitations, and contradictions might not apply to such a being, whose very nature is beyond human comprehension.

Related Topics

  • Infinity: Infinity is the idea of something without end. Like the Omnipotence Paradox, it challenges our understanding because it pushes the limits of what we can truly comprehend. Both concepts force us to think about the real meaning of having no limits.
  • The Problem of Evil: This is another philosophical question. If there is a being that is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good, why does evil exist? The Omnipotence Paradox relates to this because it asks questions about the limits and nature of power, which also plays a part in explaining evil in the world.
  • Free Will: The question of whether we truly have the freedom to make choices, or if everything is predetermined, has a connection to omnipotence. If there’s an all-powerful force, does it control everything? This topic is all about exploring the boundaries of control and choice.


At the end of the day, the Omnipotence Paradox is a tough nut to crack. It questions the very idea of having no limits. It forces us to think about whether the idea of being able to do anything and everything makes sense or if it’s just an illusion. By exploring this paradox, we’re not just entertaining a brain teaser; we’re delving into serious thinking about what power truly is, how far it can go, and where we might be fooling ourselves. Although the paradox doesn’t offer a clear answer, it’s an important tool for testing our ideas and making us think about the world and our beliefs in a more detailed and deeper way.