(April 1, 2016 at 3:25 pm)JuliaL Wrote: Seems Plantiga wants to re-define omnipotent from "able to do anything," to "able to do anything that he is not limited in doing."
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Plan...ll_defense
Quote:Plantinga argues that God, in spite of being omnipotent, has some limitations on his power.
I'll go with pathetic behind door number three, Bob.
That comes up a lot here. Omnipotent does not mean what you think it means. Look at the bold from wikipedia...
The term omnipotent has been used to connote a number of different positions. These positions include, but are not limited to, the following:
1 A deity is able to do anything that it chooses to do.[1]
2 A deity is able to do anything that is in accord with its own nature (thus, for instance, if it is a logical consequence of a deity's nature that what it speaks is truth, then it is not able to lie).
3 Hold that it is part of a deity's nature to be consistent and that it would be inconsistent for said deity to go against its own laws unless there was a reason to do so.[2]
4 A deity can bring about any state of affairs which is logically possible for anyone to bring about in that situation.
5 A deity is able to do anything that corresponds with its omniscience and therefore with its worldplan.
6 Every action performed in the world is 'actually' being performed by the deity, either due to omni-immanence, or because all actions must be 'supported' or 'permitted' by the deity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence
