A Just and Loving God?

[rossum]

PraRFLEsEkHm:

Where I believe you erred is in the idea that Jesus the man and Christ the Divine are equal (The same).

My two premises were that 1) Jesus is a human being and 2) Jesus is God. If you wish to change these to 1) Jesus is a human being and 2) Christ is God then I would just need to add a third premise to the effect that 3) Jesus is Christ and my logic would remain intact. If you are denying that Jesus is Christ then that is not in accordance with my understanding of Christian theology, which I admit might be incorrect.

hurst:

Since Jesus is God, you could use that logic to reduce God to any other human limitation.

Yes, that is correct. Since Jesus was a man and suffers all human limitations then as Jesus is also God then God must also suffer all human limitations.

hurst:

We could make a whole list of similar things, “proving” God must eat, must have a physical body, etc.

Yes, the same logic does apply to a number of other characteristics. As to God having a physical body, depending on how literally you take the Bible you can find references to God’s hands, arms, face, back and nostrils that I can think of. There are different concepts of YHWH/God in the Bible as the concept of God developed over time. Some of those concepts are rather more physical than the currently standard version.

hurst:

P1 Moral Law does not apply to God
P2 Jesus is God
L1 (P1, P2) Moral Law does not apply to Jesus

P3 Jesus is a human being.
C (L1, P3) Moral Law does not apply to human beings

Here I do not agree as the logic is incorrect. The correct conclusion is C) Moral Law does not apply to all human beings. The logic only shows that Jesus is not subject to Moral Law it says nothing about other human beings. Remember that there is only one God, but there are many human beings so the logic is assymetric in this respect. If there were many Gods then that would change the logic of my initial argument - it only shows that YHWH is subject to Moral Law but says nothing about Shiva. The same fault applies to the syllogism about human beings not being created.

hurst:

In other words, your error is that not every human being is also God.

This is not an error, since it is not part of my argument. My argument moves from humans to the singular God; as I showed above it does not go the other way because there is more than one human being.

rossum

 

[rossum]

hurst:

He is the cause of the Moral Law.

This immediately leads to the Euthyphro Dilemma - does God have a choice about Moral Law? If God has a choice then Moral Law is arbitrary - He could have said “Thou shalt not eat butter on a Wednesday” instead of “Thou shalt not kill”. Alternatively God did not have a choice about Moral Law, thus implying that there is a source of morality separate from God. My position is the second one - all living things, including God, are subject to Moral Law.

rossum

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

rossum:

My two premises were that 1) Jesus is a human being and 2) Jesus is God. If you wish to change these to 1) Jesus is a human being and 2) Christ is God then I would just need to add a third premise to the effect that 3) Jesus is Christ and my logic would remain intact. If you are denying that Jesus is Christ then that is not in accordance with my understanding of Christian theology, which I admit might be incorrect.

rossum

Not incorrect - but incomplete. The two premises are correct, as far as they go - Jesus is both God and man. BUT: Two natures in one body, Fully God, and Fully human at the same time, in one body. God came down from heaven and assumed the ‘cloak’ of humanity, while remaining God, in human form. His human form was subject to all the same things we are - hunger, thirst, temptation, pain, heat, cold etc. etc., all while being God at the same time, the author of all law (Being the creator of all things which contain the law) and humans, and as such is the Force which keeps us from completely destroying ourselves in Sin - and so being lost forever.

As such He must at one and the same time always operate for the good of ALL life - not just some. Past, present and future life. Because He is God, knows everything, and is all powerful - we must subject ourselves to His Law, His Mercy, His wisdom, and His Justice. Because - without God we are doomed to hell which was created for Satan and his fallen Angels.

God is Just - he will remove from this present reality (and merciful): that which will ultimately do irreparable harm to it. We may not understand the why of that action - and we are powerless to stop it for good reason - we are NOT God.

I do not blame you for not understanding the dual nature of Christ - understanding comes from the Holy Spirit of God. In order to have the Holy Spirit - you must submit to the authority of God - something you clearly have not done. I will pray for you that you find Him in your searchings, and that you do spend time meditating on this mystery, since it would seem that once you cross this hurdle - the rest of Christianity will open up for you.

See the Athanasian Creed

Please try and understand this - As Catholics we have a reasoned faith…but it is reason WITH humility. We do not know or understand everything…we are finite beings, (as Christ is) - trying to understand the infinite, who is God (contained in Christ). There is a limit to what we can understand, or explain even if we have understanding, because with the infinite - understanding comes from God Himself.

Peace

John

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

rossum:

This immediately leads to the Euthyphro Dilemma - does God have a choice about Moral Law? If God has a choice then Moral Law is arbitrary - He could have said “Thou shalt not eat butter on a Wednesday” instead of “Thou shalt not kill”.

rossum

God could have said that - and in some ways did. See Leviticus and the levitical laws the Jews had (still believe they have) to follow. Although those are not moral laws - they are non-the-less laws which need(ed) to be followed, or sin would result.

Peace

John