Manhood and Godhood are contradictory by definition

Manhood and Godhood are contradictory by definition

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    God isn't beholden to logic.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      So do you consider it illogical? Also, why isn't God beholden to logic?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        If God created logic why would he be beholden to it?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Because it's also applicable to God itself

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            But which God of the Gods?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why??

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            If God is not bound to logic, then how are supposed to talk about him? If you can't talk about him, then what are we talking about? Basically, about nothing.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If God is not bound to logic, then how are supposed to talk about him?
            Revelation aka the Bible (or the Quran, the Talmud. the Veda etc.).

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You can't understand language, if does not rely on logic.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Never said God didn't use logic just not beholden to it.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            How is God supposed to "reveal" himself, if he can't talk about himself, because he's outside of logic - you know, the mode of communication. You make no sense, just as your God.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Try reading my previous post again moron.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            No need to do so. Your move or do you give up?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            How does that solve the issue? If God isn't bound to logic then nothing in any holy book has to apply to him. "God is/has/does X because the holy book says so" is a logical statement

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            "Logic" is a fallible human invention which regularly fails to explain the world and calls common occurrences impossible, yet a prioricels will defend it against a literal transcendent divinity who overflows all categories. Lmao!

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >just switch off your brain and believe it bro

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >God isn't beholden to logic.
      Is he beholden to this statement?

    • 6 months ago
      DoctorGreen
      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        A being that can do anything is nonsensical, just because you say god can do it doesn't make it sensible

        • 6 months ago
          DoctorGreen

          it's just powercreep

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I hate this pseud like you wouldn't believe. he is literally just making shit up and all of it can be defeated with a simple "why is that the case?" other theologians agree
        >hell isn't a punishment it's locked from the inside you want to go to hell
        >why do you think that?
        >because it sounds nicer than regular way
        >why can god only do the intrinsically possible
        >because I said so
        >where do the obstacles come from if god created everything? wouldn't that imply something a priori to god
        >shut up
        like none of this is confirmed by anything or logically sound he is just making shit up.l

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Only by the standard of definition of failed, fallen, sinful "men" that populate the world since Eden. Christ Jesus is the true Adam, the only true Man to ever exist, before which all other humans are just pathetic trannies.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Did Jesus have free will

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        he's God, so yes

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    All praise to the Goddesses and Gods.

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why exactly would it be if God is omnipotent?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Omnipotency doesn't mean being able to do anything, like creating a rock it can't carry

      Why??

      Because you can apply logic to anything (?) I don't get your point.

      >If God is not bound to logic, then how are supposed to talk about him?
      Revelation aka the Bible (or the Quran, the Talmud. the Veda etc.).

      All of them can be logically parsed

      Never said God didn't use logic just not beholden to it.

      But so would you admit that manhood and godhood are contradictory?

      In the context of my doctrine, manhood and Godhood need not be contradictory. The belief system recognizes that humans can occasionally glimpse the divine and approach a state of heightened understanding. This doesn't necessarily negate their human nature but rather emphasizes the potential for individuals to transcend limitations and see the broader, divine tapestry of existence while still being firmly rooted in their humanity.

      >In the context of my doctrine, manhood and Godhood need not be contradictory
      So you are changing what it means to be man and to be God
      >The belief system recognizes that humans can occasionally glimpse the divine and approach a state of heightened understanding. This doesn't necessarily negate their human nature but rather emphasizes the potential for individuals to transcend limitations and see the broader, divine tapestry of existence while still being firmly rooted in their humanity.
      The doctrine of the Trinity implies Jesus being man and God simultaneously, not being man and sometimes shifting to a Godly state.

      • 6 months ago
        I AM

        In the faith I follow, there's a different perspective on the nature of Jesus. It doesn't align with the doctrine of the Trinity and considers the Christian scriptures as potentially misrepresentative or not aligned with the true nature of GOD. It views the portrayal of Jesus as both man and God simultaneously as a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the divine reality, rather than a valid interpretation.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Right, but in your doctrine you consider that "glimpsing the divine and approaching a state of heightened understanding" isn't the same as being God, right?

          >Omnipotent from "omnes potens" doesn't mean "powerful of anything", even though it literally means "power of anything".
          Please go ahead a give a non-contradictory definition of God.

          Yeah, but if your consider this definition of "omnipotent" then all sorts of logical contradictions will appear. Why do you say logic can't be applied to an omnipotent being?

          Jesus is the exception that proves the rule

          How does he except

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yeah, but if your consider this definition of "omnipotent" then all sorts of logical contradictions will appear.
            Yeah ik. So what's your proposition for a definition?

            > Why do you say logic can't be applied to an omnipotent being?
            I never did?

          • 6 months ago
            DoctorGreen

            >omnipotent
            Due to PIE roots (op + poti) Omnipotent means ruler of all possibilities.
            I suppose that's on line with the idea that Jesus is the greek logos.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yeah ik. So what's your proposition for a definition?
            Idk, any of them seem to imply absurdness
            >I never did?
            Sorry, it was probably another anon

            Why?

            "(...) there is an obvious puzzle as to how the same being can jointly
            embody those attributes of God and of humanity that are apparently
            incompatible. God is eternal, whilst humans have a beginning in time;
            God is infinite, humans finite; God is the creator of the universe,
            including humanity, whilst humans are part of God’s creation; God is
            omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, whilst humans are limited in power
            and knowledge and have a bounded location; and so on. Let us call this
            the incompatible-attributes problem" (Hick, 1993,102).

            "Logic" is a fallible human invention which regularly fails to explain the world and calls common occurrences impossible, yet a prioricels will defend it against a literal transcendent divinity who overflows all categories. Lmao!

            >which regularly fails to explain the world and calls common occurrences impossible
            Can you give me an example?

            it's just powercreep

            What?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >"(...) there is an obvious puzzle as to how the same being can jointly
            >embody those attributes of God and of humanity that are apparently
            >incompatible. God is eternal, whilst humans have a beginning in time;
            >God is infinite, humans finite; God is the creator of the universe,
            >including humanity, whilst humans are part of God’s creation; God is
            >omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, whilst humans are limited in power
            >and knowledge and have a bounded location; and so on. Let us call this
            >the incompatible-attributes problem" (Hick, 1993,102).
            Jesus has always existed, but hasn't always existed as a human. Most of the other contradictions are cleared up from there, and the ones that don't get down into the subjective question "what is a man?" If a human gained the capabilities of God but still had a human body, I don't see why they shouldn't still be considered human. Obviously this isn't what happened with Jesus as he was God before man, but the point still stands.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus has always existed, but hasn't always existed as a human.
            Fine
            >Most of the other contradictions are cleared up from there
            Not really, everytime the human nature is mentioned it implies the negation at least of omnipotency, and omniscience. For example when in the Bible Jesus says that the Father is greater than him or that only the Father knows a specific date, these things are usually explained by his two simultaneous natures, right? Which are contradictory.
            >and the ones that don't get down into the subjective question "what is a man?" If a human gained the capabilities of God but still had a human body, I don't see why they shouldn't still be considered human. Obviously this isn't what happened with Jesus as he was God before man, but the point still stands.
            If a man gained the capabilities of God he wouldn't be "like us in everything but sin" (Fourth Eucharistic Prayer), right? I don't know what is the Protestant view on this affirmation though.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Not really, everytime the human nature is mentioned it implies the negation at least of omnipotency, and omniscience. For example when in the Bible Jesus says that the Father is greater than him or that only the Father knows a specific date, these things are usually explained by his two simultaneous natures, right? Which are contradictory.
            I disagree that they are truly contradictory. Jesus is a human, so he does as a human should, which is serve and pray to God, even though he is God. Before the resurrection, he was also bound by some human limitations, as he was living and suffering like us. His omnipotence, omniscience and such, didn't seem to be reflexive. He is shown not to know everything with the whole "only the Father knows" thing, and it's ambiguous if the scene with the woman at the well was him using a rhetorical device when he asked her about her husband, or if he checked that information after the fact. He was still God, just a God that had purposely limited himself when he was born. Jesus still possesses a human perspective, but he isn't bound by human limitations. We will never be God, but we will also be less limited after the resurrection, at least in some aspects. Being mortal is a part of being human, but it won't always be. Sinfulness is also, but Jesus did not sin, and after resurrection, neither shall believers.

            >If a man gained the capabilities of God he wouldn't be "like us in everything but sin" (Fourth Eucharistic Prayer), right? I don't know what is the Protestant view on this affirmation though.
            Not unless they chose to be. Omnipotence and all.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Omnipotent from "omnes potens" doesn't mean "powerful of anything", even though it literally means "power of anything".
        Please go ahead a give a non-contradictory definition of God.

  5. 6 months ago
    I AM

    In the context of my doctrine, manhood and Godhood need not be contradictory. The belief system recognizes that humans can occasionally glimpse the divine and approach a state of heightened understanding. This doesn't necessarily negate their human nature but rather emphasizes the potential for individuals to transcend limitations and see the broader, divine tapestry of existence while still being firmly rooted in their humanity.

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Jesus is the exception that proves the rule

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why?

  8. 6 months ago
    Dirk

    >god can't become man because... Because he just can't!
    >three persons can't be one god because... Because they just can't!

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Restate that in the form of an argument

      >Not really, everytime the human nature is mentioned it implies the negation at least of omnipotency, and omniscience. For example when in the Bible Jesus says that the Father is greater than him or that only the Father knows a specific date, these things are usually explained by his two simultaneous natures, right? Which are contradictory.
      I disagree that they are truly contradictory. Jesus is a human, so he does as a human should, which is serve and pray to God, even though he is God. Before the resurrection, he was also bound by some human limitations, as he was living and suffering like us. His omnipotence, omniscience and such, didn't seem to be reflexive. He is shown not to know everything with the whole "only the Father knows" thing, and it's ambiguous if the scene with the woman at the well was him using a rhetorical device when he asked her about her husband, or if he checked that information after the fact. He was still God, just a God that had purposely limited himself when he was born. Jesus still possesses a human perspective, but he isn't bound by human limitations. We will never be God, but we will also be less limited after the resurrection, at least in some aspects. Being mortal is a part of being human, but it won't always be. Sinfulness is also, but Jesus did not sin, and after resurrection, neither shall believers.

      >If a man gained the capabilities of God he wouldn't be "like us in everything but sin" (Fourth Eucharistic Prayer), right? I don't know what is the Protestant view on this affirmation though.
      Not unless they chose to be. Omnipotence and all.

      >His omnipotence, omniscience and such, didn't seem to be reflexive
      What do you mean by reflexive?
      >He was still God, just a God that had purposely limited himself when he was born.
      Can God limit himself and stop being God?
      >Not unless they chose to be. Omnipotence and all.
      If a man gained the capabilities of God and then chose to be like us in everything but sin again, wouldn't that imply having to lose the capabilities or God? Otherwise he wouldn't be quite like us.

      God can do whatever he wants and you can't stop him.

      Can God limit himself and stop being God?

      • 6 months ago
        Dirk

        Ok
        There is no logical issue with a tripersonal being. There is no logical issue with an incarnate God.

  9. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    God can do whatever he wants and you can't stop him.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >What do you mean by reflexive?
      I meant more in a passive sense. It's possible to read that before being resurrected, Jesus didn't know all things at all times, only when he tried to recall them, much like a person remembering something.
      >Can God limit himself and stop being God?
      Jesus never stopped being God, but probably.
      >If a man gained the capabilities of God and then chose to be like us in everything but sin again, wouldn't that imply having to lose the capabilities or God?
      Depends on how it was done, and whether it made him just some guy, or if he had the qualities of a human, but does not lack God qualities. And once again, we fall into "What is a man?" I suck at reading intent, but I'm guessing you're trying to define humans by their limitations. What you or another conceive to be human may not be the same as another human, or of God.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >before being resurrected, Jesus didn't know all things at all times
        So he wouldn't be omniscient and thus wouldn't be God though
        >Jesus never stopped being God
        But you said Jesus was "a God that had purposely limited himself when he was born". If he put more limits to itself, he would stop being God, because God has no limits (other than doing contradictory things).
        >but probably God could stop being God
        How?
        >And once again, we fall into "What is a man?" I suck at reading intent, but I'm guessing you're trying to define humans by their limitations.
        Yes, I define a man by his limitations. What would be the qualities of a human?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          being resurrected, Jesus didn't know all things at all times
          >So he wouldn't be omniscient and thus wouldn't be God though
          never stopped being God
          >But you said Jesus was "a God that had purposely limited himself when he was born". If he put more limits to itself, he would stop being God, because God has no limits (other than doing contradictory things).
          God is a being, not a definition.

          >How?
          Omnipotence means he should potentially be able to make himself not omnipotent.

          >Yes, I define a man by his limitations. What would be the qualities of a human?
          I view it more as a fuzzy topic that mostly takes into account birth and perspective. Jesus may have the senses of God, but he also has human eyes and human ears to perceive with. He was born a man, lived as a man, died as a man, and rose as a man. The fact he is also God doesn't negate that.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *