A Proof Against Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonsofquestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tonsofquestions

Guest
What follows is a proof exposing what I think is a contradiction in Catholicism. I am very interested to hear your feedback and refutations.

#1) God the Son consists of both a human and a Divine nature.

#2) God the Son’s Divine nature knows everything, omniscient, I believe the word is

#3) God the Son cannot say anything that is untrue

#4) God the Son said that God the Son(which would include both his human and his Divine natures) does not know everything.

Knowing from #3 that God the Son cannot say anything that is untrue, coupled with #4 we get, specifically:

#5) God the Son’s Divine nature does not know everything

#2 clearly contradicts #5, which would seem to imply there is a contradiction in the Catholic faith.

Please give your feedback and tell me which of my points you disagree with. Thanks.
 
tonsofquestions said:
What follows is a proof exposing what I think is a contradiction in Catholicism. I am very interested to hear your feedback and refutations.

#1) God the Son consists of both a human and a Divine nature.

#2) God the Son’s Divine nature knows everything, omniscient, I believe the word is

#3) God the Son cannot say anything that is untrue

#4) God the Son said that God the Son(which would include both his human and his Divine natures) does not know everything.

Knowing from #3 that God the Son cannot say anything that is untrue, coupled with #4 we get, specifically:

#5) God the Son’s Divine nature does not know everything

#2 clearly contradicts #5, which would seem to imply there is a contradiction in the Catholic faith.

Please give your feedback and tell me which of my points you disagree with. Thanks.
Click to expand...
One fault I see is in #5. Natures do not know things. Persons know things. So this statement has no meaning and any conclusion drawn from it is invalid.
 
davidv said:
One fault I see is in #5. Natures do not know things. Persons know things. So this statement has no meaning and any conclusion drawn from it is invalid.
Click to expand...
All right, then God the Son as a whole does not know everything. Still a contradiction with Catholicism. I put this because in another thread a Catholic said that God’s divine nature knows everything, but it kept things from his human nature, I assumed that was the Catholic position. However, the contradiction still stands.
 
tonsofquestions said:
All right, then God the Son as a whole does not know everything. Still a contradiction with Catholicism. I put this because in another thread a Catholic said that God’s divine nature knows everything, but it kept things from his human nature, I assumed that was the Catholic position. However, the contradiction still stands.
Click to expand...
Its not a contradiction, it is a pardox (it only seems contradictory). Can you see the difference?
 
TOC, here’s what you need to do. Tell us how the Incarnation should work. Tell us how a person can be fully God and fully man (“like us in all things but sin”). Does that person know everything, is able to do everything? Then he is not like us in all things but sin. Does he not know everything, is not able to do everything? Then, according to you, he is not God.

I defy you to offer an understanding of Incarnation that does not have contradictions (or, as has been pointed out, paradoxes). I am certain that you cannot do it.

And yet, if God is omnipotent, he can indeed become Incarnate. So God can do something that is impossible for you to explain or even grasp.

Are you up to the challenge?
 
Remember the Incarnation is a mystery, and we well never completly understand it in this life. Jesus was showing us how to live here on earth, not necessarily knowing everything, and that is where these types of sayings come from. His human nature was different from his divine nature. I think this is shown most clearly in the Agony in the Garden. His human nature naturally recoiled from the Passion, but his divine nature was one with the Father. He showed us how to live by the demonstration of his human nature. After the Resurrection his divine nature was shown fully.
 
VociMike said:
TOC, here’s what you need to do. Tell us how the Incarnation should work. Tell us how a person can be fully God and fully man (“like us in all things but sin”). Does that person know everything, is able to do everything? Then he is not like us in all things but sin. Does he not know everything, is not able to do everything? Then, according to you, he is not God.

I defy you to offer an understanding of Incarnation that does not have contradictions (or, as has been pointed out, paradoxes). I am certain that you cannot do it.

And yet, if God is omnipotent, he can indeed become Incarnate. So God can do something that is impossible for you to explain or even grasp.

Are you up to the challenge?
Click to expand...
I lack the theological background to offer an idea of how the Incarnation should work. However, it would have been very easy for God to have the Incarnation happen in a way that this contradiction would not exist. He simply would have let Jesus have knowledge of when the end of the world would come. As this is the only thing Jesus claims to not know, once he knew that there would be no contradiction, as Jesus would know everything, and the idea that He was all knowing would be fine.
 
davidv said:
Its not a contradiction, it is a pardox (it only seems contradictory). Can you see the difference?
Click to expand...
What is the difference? So someone can know everything and not know everything, and that isn’t a contradiction?
 
tonsofquestions said:
I lack the theological background to offer an idea of how the Incarnation should work. However, it would have been very easy for God to have the Incarnation happen in a way that this contradiction would not exist. He simply would have let Jesus have knowledge of when the end of the world would come. As this is the only thing Jesus claims to not know, once he knew that there would be no contradiction, as Jesus would know everything, and the idea that He was all knowing would be fine.
Click to expand...
You don’t understand what it means to be “like us in all things but sin”. Humans don’t know everything. God does.

I see responses like yours quite a bit, which is why I go out of my way to challenge them. Your response is essentially “I don’t know how God could have done it, I just know that he couldn’t have done it the way the Christian faith says he did.” Well, pardon me for not being impressed by such a non-argument. 🙂
 
tonsofquestions said:
What is the difference? So someone can know everything and not know everything, and that isn’t a contradiction?
Click to expand...
To be fully human and fully divine at the same time seems a contradiction as well, but that is what the Incarnation means. God could have not put limitations on himself in his human nature, but he chose to do it the way he did for his own reasons. He has not chosen to tell us why.
 
tonsofquestions said:
I lack the theological background to offer an idea of how the Incarnation should work.
Click to expand...
Then on what basis can you claim what you did in the OP?
However, it would have been very easy for God to have the Incarnation happen in a way that this contradiction would not exist. He simply would have let Jesus have knowledge of when the end of the world would come. As this is the only thing Jesus claims to not know, once he knew that there would be no contradiction, as Jesus would know everything, and the idea that He was all knowing would be fine.
Click to expand...
Sounds you know better than God how things should have happened. Do you?
 
katy said:
To be fully human and fully divine at the same time seems a contradiction as well, but that is what the Incarnation means. God could have not put limitations on himself in his human nature, but he chose to do it the way he did for his own reasons. He has not chosen to tell us why.
Click to expand...
But He said the Son does not know, which would imply that no part of him, human or Divine, knew. Put since he was Divine, he would know.
 
Hi,

I don’t know if this changes anything but isn’t Jesus a divine person with a divine nature and a human nature? And wouldn’t His divine person know everything? Maybe that doesn’t mean anything but…yeah. That might not clear up the “contradiction” but it might…

Pax,
Zach
 
VociMike said:
You don’t understand what it means to be “like us in all things but sin”. Humans don’t know everything. God does.

I see responses like yours quite a bit, which is why I go out of my way to challenge them. Your response is essentially “I don’t know how God could have done it, I just know that he couldn’t have done it the way the Christian faith says he did.” Well, pardon me for not being impressed by such a non-argument. 🙂
Click to expand...
I pardon you.
 
davidv said:
Sounds you know better than God how things should have happened. Do you?
Click to expand...
First of all, did you read what VociMike said, he asked me how I thought it should have been done, so I told him. And I don’t claim to know better than God how things should have happened, but I did see a way that what Catholics claim happened could have been done without contradiction.
 
There seems to be an issue here of whether God can do something that contradicts itself. What is the Catholic position? Can God make a square circle?
 
davidv said:
Its not a contradiction, it is a pardox (it only seems contradictory). Can you see the difference?
Click to expand...
You never did answer my question. What is your definition of a contradiction, and what is your definition of a paradox?
 
1ke said:
No, it does not imply that at all.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the Son one of the three persons of the Trinity? If He says, “the Son does not know”, wouldn’t that imply that no part of the Son knew? If the “divine part” of the Son, for lack of a better term, did know, then “the Son does not know” wouldn’t be a true statement, would it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top