Hmmm. I think it depends on God's intention. But darn good point!
And, if I were God I would only make edible things for me that I couldn't eat as eating is a pain (why can't he make meals in a pill while he's making big sanga's?!!).
Yes. If god can make a sandwich too big for him to eat it may indeed solve world hunger.
All,
I'd like to point out that this was a genuine philosophical question...although I'll admit it's surprising how quickly I have turned it into a joke about lunchtime treats.
If we assume that God is unchanging, and therefore God's all powerful nature is static and, ironically, finite, the answer is no. If we allow for the possibility that God can transcend even God's own transcendent nature, the answer is yes.
As one of the two openly Christian* readers of this blog, allow me to say I DON'T KNOW. But assuming that your mother is right is usually a good starting point.
I prefer easier questions, like "Can God create two mountains without putting a valley between them?", to which the answer is "Yes, just fill the intervening space with water and call it a lake."
*I'm not suggesting for a moment that Jewish, Islamic and any otherwise monotheistic types should not be playing too.
When I was very little I imagined that God was a very small creature with sticks protruding from him. Kind of like Cousin It, but with sticks instead of hair. I can imagine that god making a sandwich too big for him to eat, and then not being able to eat it, but I don't recall that he had either hands or a mouth.
Where I got the notion that God's physical manifestation was as I imagined I have no idea. I think the bearded old man leaning out of a cloud should have been the way to go, but you can't predict a child's imagination. Why I had a prickly god is anyone's guess. Maybe it explains my atheism.
Mmmm I do kind of find it funny that god often appears to bear a striking resemblance to Karl Marx, although were there to be an omnipotent being (assuming a male human form) I would much prefer it to look like Groucho.
15 Comments:
I say 'no'. Because God is perfect and if he aimed to make a sandwich too big for Him to eat then dagnabbit he'd get it right!
Praise be, etc.
i would say...
Why does God need to eat?
EB,
Yes, but if God can do anything (including make a sandwich too big for him to eat) then couldn't He eat that sandwich?
Y'know, being all-powerful and all?
Mex,
Yes - good question.
I would also ask why God wants to eat a sandwich, given that He could presumably make anything in the world, nay, universe, He wants.
Hmmm. I think it depends on God's intention.
But darn good point!
And, if I were God I would only make edible things for me that I couldn't eat as eating is a pain (why can't he make meals in a pill while he's making big sanga's?!!).
EB,
yeah. Or beetroot dip.
Leilani,
Yes. If god can make a sandwich too big for him to eat it may indeed solve world hunger.
All,
I'd like to point out that this was a genuine philosophical question...although I'll admit it's surprising how quickly I have turned it into a joke about lunchtime treats.
If we assume that God is unchanging, and therefore God's all powerful nature is static and, ironically, finite, the answer is no. If we allow for the possibility that God can transcend even God's own transcendent nature, the answer is yes.
As one of the two openly Christian* readers of this blog, allow me to say I DON'T KNOW. But assuming that your mother is right is usually a good starting point.
I prefer easier questions, like "Can God create two mountains without putting a valley between them?", to which the answer is "Yes, just fill the intervening space with water and call it a lake."
*I'm not suggesting for a moment that Jewish, Islamic and any otherwise monotheistic types should not be playing too.
no i mean why does god need to eat? surely Mr Omnipotent doesnt need to eat at all. do we eat in heaven?
Personally I am of the opinion that the sandwich doesn't actually exist.
INCRaig,
Yes. She often is. Although not yesterday, which is surprising.
Mex,
I don't know. Just because He doesn't need to eat, doesn't mean he might not want to.
Mr From,
Sure...as you know that's kind of my position too. But I'm intrigued by the notion of how people conceptualise God nonetheless....
When I was very little I imagined that God was a very small creature with sticks protruding from him. Kind of like Cousin It, but with sticks instead of hair. I can imagine that god making a sandwich too big for him to eat, and then not being able to eat it, but I don't recall that he had either hands or a mouth.
Where I got the notion that God's physical manifestation was as I imagined I have no idea. I think the bearded old man leaning out of a cloud should have been the way to go, but you can't predict a child's imagination. Why I had a prickly god is anyone's guess. Maybe it explains my atheism.
Mmmm I do kind of find it funny that god often appears to bear a striking resemblance to Karl Marx, although were there to be an omnipotent being (assuming a male human form) I would much prefer it to look like Groucho.
I can imagine Zoolander asking that question.
Meva,
That is high-larious. Sticks!
BF,
Sure. I can see that.
Helen,
DID he though? I can't remember where I first heard the question being posed, but it has always tickled me.
DID he though? I can't remember where I first heard the question being posed, but it has always tickled me.
It also sounds a lot like the Fafblog.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home