Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-30160565-20170507010841/@comment-29375707-20170523141748

Well, this paradox has already been answered in many different ways, I can take as an example the scholastic definition presented by Thomas Aquinas in ''Summa Theologiæ I, Q. XXV Art. 3''. The scholastic definition, in which omnipotence does not in itself encompass contradictions.

If we consider the dialetheist position, or even the paraconsistent logic, God could at the same time be able and not be able to raise the stone. To give an example of how it applies, consider the paradoxes of self-reference as the liar paradox, which consists of the following:
 * Affirmation 1: Affirmation 1 is false.

Note that regardless of the conclusion you try to make, the statement must be both true and false. Another structure to the paradox of the liar is the following:
 * Affirmation 1: Affirmation 2 is true.
 * Affirmation 2: Affirmation 1 is false.

Note also that if you consider one as false, you will have to consider another as true, which will lead you to consider the other truthful by making it false. This is both true and false.

There is a field in the logic called paraconsistence, where the entities that are contradictory to themselves fit together, and yet they exist, as is the case of photons that can act at the same time as wave (non-particle) and particle (non-wave) and the paradoxical affirmations of the liar paradox. This area exists because of limitations perceived in classical logic, and some moments in which the principle of non-contradiction proposed by Aristotle was violated in reality (besides, it can't be proved, it is supported only by axioms, and may or may not be true).

With the advent of paraconsistent logic, the principle of non-contradiction comes to be perceived as non-absolute, and dialheism again gains strength. We thus need to assume that some contradictions may exist, and as was assumed in the first congress of logic and religion, God is a paraconsistent being and may therefore violate the principle of non-contradiction.