This answer says God is able to do only things less than God. If you say there exists a mountain that is "heavier than anybody is able to lift," then what you say is funny: it means nothing, because God is able to lift any mountain. This is because saying a mountain is "too heavy to lift" means this mountain cannot be lifted by anybody. This does not mean that God is too weak to lift very heavy mountains. God cannot lift an "unliftable" mountain because that would not make sense. He also cannot create an "unliftable" mountain because that also would not make sense, if God can lift everything. God could still lift any mountain that is not defined as "cannot be lifted." For example, God can make a mountain as heavy as he wants, but he cannot make a round square.
In logic, problems can often be solved by breaking them into smaller pieces. One solves each of the small problems.
Let us see how one can use this for the God Paradox. The paradox is:
If one changes this question to a sentence, it becomes:
We can make this even simpler. First we must see that because God can do anything:
Now we can write the sentence as these facts:
Facts 1, 2 and 3 must always be true. Now we must see if fact 4 is true or false:
The conclusion is that the statement "God can do anything" needs to be qualified. By this logic God cannot do both of two things that are mutually contradictory. C. S. Lewis says that logical contradictions are not a "thing". Rather they are nonsense. The question (and therefore the perceived paradox) is meaningless. Nonsense does not suddenly acquire sense and meaning with the addition of the two words, "God can" before it.
Some people think, "Yes, God is able to do things that make Him not able." They think God is able to do things that are funny to think, "Because", they say, "there is nothing God is not able to do." (See Gospel of Matthew 19:26) However other Bible verses mention things that God cannot do. Hebrews 6:16 says that God cannot lie. Malachi 3:6 says that God cannot change. James 1:3 says that God cannot be tempted by sin.
Some have suggested that God can do things that defy conventional logic. If He lives in other dimensions a different logic may apply. Some say that God cannot make a square circle. This is true in a two dimensional world. However, a cylinder can be a square viewed from the side and a circle viewed from the top. Likewise, a triangle can have three angles that add to more that 180 degrees. This is possible only on a three dimensional surface like a sphere. It can't be done on a two dimensional plane. (Plane geometry). Addition of an additional dimension changes the logic.
God is beyond limitation. His strength is infinite. If He chooses to create a mountain that is too heavy for Him to lift he would simultaneously become strong enough to lift it (which actually means he's not omnipotent, because if he can gradually become stronger, then he can't be all powerful). To ask if the creation of such a mountain is possible is to attempt putting a limitation on the limitless.
At the end of the Book of Job, God 'answered Job out of the whirlwind' and asks him:
'Who is this that darkens council by words without knowledge?..where were you when I laid the foundations of the Earth?' (Job chapter 38, 1-4)
In other words, God's powers are beyond human understanding, as human reason itself is part of God's creation in the Book of Genesis.
These references may not be simple to understand.
Libertarianism
Libertarianism is a view in politics and philosophy that focuses on liberty. Libertarianism says that it is usually better to give people more free choice. It also says that the government should have less control over people. There are different kinds of libertarianism in both left-wing and right-wing politics.
Libertarianism grew out of liberalism as a movement in the 1800s. Many of the beliefs of libertarianism are similar to the beliefs in classical liberalism. It also has roots in anarchism and the Austrian School of economics.
Libertarians believe that no person can justly own or control the body of another person, what they call ‘self-ownership’ or ’individual sovereignty.’ In simple words, every person has a right to control her or his own body.
In the 19th century, United States libertarians like William Lloyd Garrison, Frederick Douglass, and Lysander Spooner were all abolitionists. Abolitionists were people who wanted to end slavery right away.
Garrison based his opposition to slavery on the idea of self-ownership. Since you have a natural right to control your own body, no one else has any right to steal that control from you. Garrison and Douglass both called slave masters ‘man stealers.’
If you have a right to control your own body, then no one has a right to start violence (or force) against you.
Some libertarians believe that all violence is unjust. These libertarians are often called "anarcho-pacifists". Robert LeFevre was a libertarian who rejected all violence. However, most libertarians believe that there are some ways violence can be justified.
One thing that justifies violence is self defense. If someone is violent towards you, you have a right to defend yourself with equal force.
The libertarian Murray N. Rothbard said that it would be wrong to kill someone for stealing a pack of gum. If you steal gum, this is an act of violence against the property owner. The owner has a right to use defensive violence to get the gum back, but killing the thief goes too far. That is too much force because it is not equal to the force used by the thief. Punishment must be equal to the crime. A student and colleague of his, Walter Block, said that a punishment should not be equal to the crime, but rather enough to make up for the damage the crime caused plus how much it cost to catch the criminal.
Some libertarians believe that it is your moral duty to defend yourself and your property if you can. This belief is usually held by Objectivists. These people believe that pacifism is immoral. Most libertarians disagree with this view.
All libertarians believe that it is wrong to start violence against any person or against what he or she owns. They call this the "non-aggression principle."
Ownership is the right to control something. Property is the thing that you control.
Libertarians believe that property rights come from self-ownership. This means that because you have a right to control your own body, you also have a right to control what you make with it.
The English philosopher John Locke said that a person comes to own something by using it. So, if you turn an area that no-one else owns into a farm and use it, that area becomes your property. This is called the "homestead principle."
Libertarians also say that you can become a legitimate owner by receiving something as a gift or by trading it with someone for something they own. You do not become a legitimate owner by stealing. You also do not become a legitimate owner by simply "saying" you own something. If you have not "homesteaded" the thing or received it through trade or gift, you do not own it.
Libertarians are opposed to states (or governments) creating any "laws" that tell people what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. The only legitimate laws are laws that say a person may not start violence against other people or their legitimate property. All "laws" stopping people from doing nonviolent things should be repealed, according to libertarians. (These "laws" are usually called "victimless crimes" because there is no victim if there is no harm.)