57. The prevalent opinion today is that God's omnipotence resembles the absolute power of a king in this world, who can act at his pleasure however he wishes: acquit or condemn whom he will, make the guilty innocent, pronounce the traitor loyal, promote the unworthy and undeserving over the heads of the worthy and deserving, even on any pretext snatch away his subjects' goods, condemn them to death, and do other similar things. As a result of this absurd opinion, belief and teaching about the Divine omnipotence, as many falsities, fallacies and chimeras have invaded the church, as there are nuances, systems and derivations of belief there. As many more can invade too, as jars can be filled with water from a large lake, or as snakes can crawl out of their holes and lie basking in the sunshine of the Arabian desert. It takes only the two words 'omnipotence' and 'faith', and then one can scatter among the common people as many guesses, fictions and rubbish as occur to the bodily senses. Both of these terms banish reason,- but if reason is banished, how is human thought superior to the reason of the birds that fly overhead? What then is the spiritual side, which distinguishes man from animals, but like the stench of zoos, which is agreeable to wild beasts, but not to human beings, unless they are like beasts?
[2] If the Divine omnipotence extended as much to doing evil as to doing good, what would be the distinction between God and the devil? It would surely be like that between two rulers, one of whom is both king and tyrant, the other a tyrant whose power is limited, so he cannot properly be called a king. Or between a shepherd who is allowed to keep leopards as well as sheep, and one who is not allowed to do this. Anyone can know that good and evil are opposites, and that if God by His omnipotence could will both at once and by willing them do them, He could in fact do nothing. This so far from being omnipotence would be a negation of His power. It would be like two wheels turning in opposite directions; the effect would be to stop both wheels and produce a stationary state. Or like a ship sailing against a strong current, which without an anchor to hold it would be swept away and wrecked. Or like a person with two inconsistent wills, so that when one is active the other must necessarily be inactive; if both were to act at the same time, his mind would be a prey to delirium and dizziness.