Answering a Critic's Supposed Dilemma

I don’t remember where I heard it, but I heard an atheist* try to trap a theist in a supposed contradictory paradox (similar to the Omnipotence Paradox) when discussing the resurrection of Jesus being a miracle (defined as breaking/suspending the Laws of Physics). The atheist argument goes like this:

QUESTION:

“If God can’t break the Laws of Logic or the Laws of Mathematics, how can God coherently break the Laws of Physics?”

I really started chewing on this thought, I thought it was quite profound, but yet am one who believes, not only that miracles do still occur today, but also that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a miracle (the suspension of transcendent and universal physical laws). I realized that the longer I think about this “paradox”, staying off my phone, off the television, off the computer, off the (fill in the blank), the more I was able to actually contemplate something deep. I love these moments because nowadays we are always oversaturated with instant gratification, instant answers, instant (fill in the blank). I was able to think through this “dilemma” on my own, without seeking to adopt other views on the matter. Whether my explanation is right or wrong, you can decide, but the process of contemplation felt good. And sadly, most people no longer contemplate anything. Rather, most people simply go to Google, ChatGPT, Grok, or any other medium to find an instant “answer.” Even though that “answer” may be completely incorrect.

So, what is my objection to this paradox?

First, we must slow down and seek to understand what are the: Laws of Logic, Laws of Mathematics, and Laws of Physics.

Laws of Logic - Law of Identity, Law of Non-Contradiction, Law of Excluded Middle: these are laws that allow for coherent conversation, coherent living, and is a reflection of the reality around us. Law of Identity, A is A; Law of Non-Contradiction, A can’t be A and not A at the same time; Law of Excluded Middle, A is either A or not A.

Laws of Mathematics - i.e., the Commutative Law, Associative Law: these are laws that allow us to understand how something is created or designed. The Commutative Law, changing the order of the factors/numbers doesn’t change the result. The Associative Law, the ways numbers are grouped in addition and multiplication doesn’t change the result.

Laws of Physics - i.e., Law of Gravity, Law of Conservation of Energy, Law of Angular Momentum: these laws describe how the universe, our reality is designed. The Law of Gravity, what goes up must come down. The Law of Conservation of Energy, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only changed. The Law of Angular Momentum, something spinning one direction will remain spinning that direction until it loses all its energy or is met by an external force.

Understanding the rudimentary basics of these three categorical “laws”, we can see what each law reveals. First, as mentioned above, the Laws of Logic describe the reality we see, the characteristics of our world, or as many others like me would say, they are intrinsic, not only to the character of our reality, but intrinsic to the character and nature of God. This means that in one sense, the Laws of Logic are ontological, meaning they describe God. On the other hand, they are also epistemological, meaning that we can know what is true based upon these laws.

Moving on to the Laws of Mathematics, when math is often called the “language of God”, they describe the design of the universe and all things within it. Mathematics doesn’t answer the question of who or why, but rather how. And the Laws of Mathematics derive their coherency from the Laws of Logic, for we know that no matter what, 1+1 will equal 2 today, tomorrow, and next year. The Laws of Logic aren’t contingent upon the Laws of Mathematics, they are necessary. And because they describe how the universe, and other things work, they are considered epistemological; we ascertain our actions and constructions based upon the knowledge acquired through math.

Finally, the Laws of Physics, similar to the Laws of Mathematics, describe the universe we see, and how properties interact with one another. While the Laws of Logic and Laws of Mathematics are viewed as necessary, the Laws of Physics are seen as contingent. Meaning, they are contingent upon something else. If there was no object for gravity to influence, then would the law exist? How would we come to know about the Law of Gravity? Also, while this universe was designed with these physical laws in place, it is possible that if a new world was created, then different laws may be established. Because the Laws of Physics describe our world, they are known as epistemological rather than ontological. But because they exist, they can be seen as ontological.

Ok, so seeing a basic definition of these “laws” as well as what they reveal about reality, the other thing I had considered was whether or not any of these laws can be influenced, changed, or interacted with. So, the Laws of Logic and Laws of Mathematics cannot be changed or manipulated because they are intrinsically describing the designs made by God and reveal the character of God, or reality. Because of this, neither the Laws of Logic nor the Laws of Mathematics are subject to God, because they reveal the character of God. They describe God. The Laws of Physics on the other hand, they don’t describe God, they describe the universe which God had designed. So, nothing is changing intrinsically of God, only changing within the universe God had designed. It’s as if saying my character traits are subject to me...that’s not accurate because my character traits aren’t separate from me but rather describe me.

Regarding the Laws of Logic, mankind can disobey these laws, and mankind can choose to ignore these laws. However, they will live inconsistently and lead to a lot of illogical actions and possible early mortality rates. Regarding the Laws of Mathematics, man can choose to ignore these laws but mankind cannot choose to disobey them. This is because Mathematics describe the design; now mankind can make choices based upon the answers, or not, to their own detriment. However, the Laws of Physics, mankind can neither ignore nor disobey them. Mankind cannot thwart any of these laws, and to attempt to live contrary to the Law of Gravity, for instance, will lead to an unfortunate death sentence.

As we see, while the Laws of Logic and the Laws of Mathematics describe God, the Laws of Physics describe God’s design. And therein lies the answer to the supposed paradox earlier. It is perfectly coherent and logical to say that God cannot break the Laws of Logic or the Laws of Mathematics, because they deal with His being, whereas the Laws of Physics deal with His creation. And just as my character traits are not subject to my being, neither the Laws of Logic nor the Laws of Mathematics are subject to God’s being. What is subject to God are the Laws of Physics, because they are not a part of God’s being, but instead a part of God’s purposeful design.

So, the answer to the question, “If God can’t break the Laws of Logic or the Laws of Mathematics, how can God coherently break the Laws of Physics?”

ANSWER:

Yes, God can break the Laws of Physics even though He cannot break the Laws of Logic or the Laws of Mathematics, because the Laws of Logic and the Laws of Mathematics describe God’s being while the Laws of Physics describe God’s design. And God’s design is subject to God’s action.

---------

* It may have been from Alex O’Connor (aka Cosmic Skeptic) where I heard this argument; he is exciting to follow as it seems he may be inching closer and closer to becoming a theist and possibly a Christian.