The Omnipotence Paradox of God is Flawed

This will cost my opponent conduct points. I will ignore these arguments as if my opponent abided by my rules and continue with the debate. Omnipotence Omnipotence can be defined in two ways, with certain subset definitions of omnipotence existing within them. Maximal Omnipotence: Omnipotence without any limitation. “This form is characterized by an omnipotence that has absolutely no limitations. Whatever can be phrased as an action is necessarily possible for God to do, even that which is logically impossible. ”[1] A subset of Maximal Omnipotence is Situational Omnipotence: The ability to make oneself omnipotent in certain circumstances and not omnipotent in other circumstances. Common Omnipotence: Omnipotence with limitation, specifically, not being able to do actions that are logically impossible. “This form insists omnipotence is characterized by having the ability to bring about any logically possible state of affairs. So any entity "E" is omnipotent if the action "A" is logically possible. That is, if "E performing A" is a logically possible state of affairs. ”[1] The Paradox The situation presents two possibilities; either God creates a rock he cannot lift and because he cannot lift it he is therefore not omnipotent, or that God does not create a rock he cannot lift and therefore is not omnipotent because he couldn’t create it. The purpose of the paradox is to show that omnipotence is either impossible or illogical. The entire situation implies the following: P1. God should be able to create any possible situation. (Create a rock he cannot lift) C1. If God cannot create any possible situation then he therefore is not omnipotent. However, the entire situation begs what form of omnipotence is being implied. It is logical that Maximal Omnipotence is being implied considering that premise one states that God should be able to create any possible situation, which directly corresponds with the definition of maximal omnipotence. This is not true for the other definitions, Common Omnipotence for example, considering that common omnipotence states that God should only be able to create any logically possible situation. Flaws in the Paradox The paradox assumes that God is maximally omnipotent, as shown by the construction of the premise and conclusion. By definition of being maximally omnipotent though, God can bring about any state of affairs. The paradox attempts to create a state that God cannot create, however because being maximally omnipotent means God could create such a state, then God can defy logic and create a stone that he cannot lift even if that cannot be comprehended by agents that exist within the laws of logic. The paradox creates a logically impossible situation, but because maximal omnipotence entails that God can create logically impossible situations then the stone paradox is defeated. “What's so powerful about this refutation of the Omnipotence Paradox is that it cannot be defeated! Any defeater would require applying logical principles (e. g. the law of non contradiction) to a God that is inferred by the paradox to exist outside of its application. It would not matter how logical any denial of my refutation is, because logic is irrelevant to a God with maximal omnipotence. ”[1] Alternatives The paradox itself implies maximal omnipotence, but what about common omnipotence or situational omnipotence? Even if we replaced maximal omnipotence with common omnipotence, the paradox still fails in that it is a logically possible situation, and as per definition of common omnipotence God cannot bring about a state of affairs that is logically impossible. Even more so, if somehow my opponent showed that it was not logically possible, then that would entail situational omnipotence whereas God can create a stone which he cannot lift in a non-omnipotent state and then lift the stone in his omnipotent state. This is an example of situational omnipotence. “A God with common omnipotence may very well bring about a state that makes him no longer omnipotent, but the conclusion that omnipotence is therefore logically impossible or incoherent simply does not follow! ”[1] Since God is no longer in an omnipotent state when such an affair happens, omnipotence cannot be proven logically impossible. [1] Matt Conniry on the Stone Paradox