God=Man (i.e. Jesus) doesn't pass the reason test

[Traci]

You can’t use reason to explain how a guy can be both man and God at the same time or how a guy can walk out of his own grave. You can give evidence that it may have happened but you can’t explain how it is possible.

All I’m saying is that it is possile to approach a challenge against faith from the standpoint of reason by pointing out that there are many thingw which we all believe beyond a shadow of a doubt but which don’t pass the test of reason. It’s not necessarily a cop-out. It’s just affirming the truth. It’s showing the guy that he wouln’t be crazy or a weirdo for believing in God, even through God can’t fully be explained. You then present evidence that it is not unreasonable to believe in such things even though they cannot be fully explained or understood. That’s all I’m saying.

-Tim-

I am following you…I think we are saying the same thing only differently

So, what is the evidence that it is not unreasonable to believe that God can become man?

 

[TimothyH]

I can logically believe that Christ is in the Eucharist even if I don’t understand how.

And that’s the exact problem presented by the OP.

The guy doesn’t understand how. The guy is using the term “Unreasonable” as a way of saying, “I don’t understand it therefor I cannot believe it. I can only understand that which is provable to me.” He is like Thomas in the upper room. “Unless I see the nail marks and put my hand into his side I will not believe.”

I mean, you gotta crack the guy somehow. I’ve used the technique with a medical student who asked how a person could rise from the dead. I simply said, “Yea, it is hard to understand. I hear what you’re saying man and I’m right with ya, on that. I really cant explain how a man dead for three days could rise. But there are lots of things which I really don’t undersand but I am 100% convinced that they are true.”

it’s just one apologetic technique which has worked for me.

Good conversation guys. I gotta go cook dinner. PAX

-Tim-

 

[JimG]

The question is not whether a man can be God, but whether a divine Person can assume a human nature. A good place to start would be Frank Sheed’s book Theology for Beginners.

 

[Traci]

Who made the comment about patience earlier, you were so right. My friend has convieniently changed gears from reason to infallability…

This is my friend’s response to all of my “reason” arguments…

“Any organization that claims infallibility in anything is actually completely fallible. And in fact, it shows fallibility in an individual that would accept moral and faith dogma from a self-proclaimed infallible organization. Especially an organization calling itself a magisterium, a magisterium of men, no women allowed, who protect the word of male gods who spoke to male authors, 2000 years ago and accidentally screwed over 300,000 years of humans before that. sorry ancient humans, christianity is only for the last few thousand years of human existence (assuming humans can’t last too long on the current streak). I have absolute faith in the fact that if god handed over the reigns to a human organization, especially one calling itself a church, or even god help us, a magisterium, to uphold the supposed pureness of the word of god in a book, they are going to screw it up big time and no spooky ghost, even if it is part of a trilogy of god figurines, is going to save the day on that one. Human organizations were graced with way too much fallibility in the days of creation.”

Ugh…where to begin…!

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Traci

*In the context of our debating he is basically saying that is isn’t logical to believe that man could be God. Earlier in the argument I claimed that faith and reason always have to jive and he is using it as an example that they don’t and it is unreasonable or there is no evidence to believe that God could ever be man. *

Well, I think he is a little mixed up about the Incarnation. A man did not become God. Rather, God the Son became Jesus Christ. He did not cease to be God. Nor did Jesus cease to be a man with God taking his place as a human being. Jesus is fully both Man and God at the same time. This makes it a mystery that we must take on faith, rather than logic.

Certain this doesn’t pass the test of reason if your friend wants to be able to understand how something is possible before he believes it is possible.

But the Big Bang is also a mystery beyond our comprehension. Some people think it is irrational to believe in a created universe. Yet science asserts the mystery without being able, now or ever, to make sense of it beyond the fact that it happened.

If your friend can believe that God is powerful enough to create the universe, why can’t he also believe that God could enter the universe of his Creation? If he doesn’t believe in God, then everything is irrational to him … as Camus and Sartre were happy to point out.

 

[Windfish]

There are two important concepts when discussing the Incarnation, and if we are clear about these concepts, then I think you will “pass the reason test.”

The concepts are nature and person. In the Incarnation, Jesus has two natures (human and divine), but he is one person. Think of the movie Avatar. The main character (I forgot his name) is one person but has two natures (human and Naavi).

Help any?

 

[davidv]

Who made the comment about patience earlier, you were so right. My friend has convieniently changed gears from reason to infallability…

This is my friend’s response to all of my “reason” arguments…

“Any organization that claims infallibility in anything is actually completely fallible. And in fact, it shows fallibility in an individual that would accept moral and faith dogma from a self-proclaimed infallible organization. Especially an organization calling itself a magisterium, a magisterium of men, no women allowed, who protect the word of male gods who spoke to male authors, 2000 years ago and accidentally screwed over 300,000 years of humans before that. sorry ancient humans, christianity is only for the last few thousand years of human existence (assuming humans can’t last too long on the current streak). I have absolute faith in the fact that if god handed over the reigns to a human organization, especially one calling itself a church, or even god help us, a magisterium, to uphold the supposed pureness of the word of god in a book, they are going to screw it up big time and no spooky ghost, even if it is part of a trilogy of god figurines, is going to save the day on that one. Human organizations were graced with way too much fallibility in the days of creation.”

Ugh…where to begin…!

By claiming you are not knowledgeable enough to deal with more than one topic at a time. Infallibility is a very different topic and the subject of the Incarnation hasn’t been resolved. Until this is resolved none of the othe “Catholic” stuff that he brings up can be resolved, as much of Catholic teaching depends on God becoming man.

 

[Windfish]

“Any organization that claims infallibility in anything is actually completely fallible.”

Is he claiming infallibility, here? Sounds like it. If so, it is self-refuting.

 

[TimothyH]

Who made the comment about patience earlier, you were so right. My friend has convieniently changed gears from reason to infallability…

This is my friend’s response to all of my “reason” arguments…

Nah… Something else is going on. I wouldn’t play.

He’s not interested in how God can also be a man or infallibility or any other doctrine of the Church or matter of faith. He is using that as a smoke screen. Something about religion scared him off. He’s a former Catholic… I’ll bet he got hurt by the Church in the past or blames the Church somehow. It could have been an overly harsh priest. It could have been a family member that made him feel guilty about some sin. It might be, and this is quite common in our Catholics Come Home ministry, that he is holding some sin from his past or has some present habitual sin and feels there is only condmnation in the Church.

Change gears on him. Ask him about his childhood or about his past. When did he leave the Church? What was the reason? How long has he been away? That sort of thing. Stop discussing doctrine and discusss spiritual things like hope and forgiveness and love. He’ll bob and weave like a prize-fighter sayng that he “Just stopped believing” or that the Church is full of hypocrites. A sure sign is if he starts “The Church is too rich” argument or if he brings up the sex scandals. He might even go dark on you, just stop returning your emails and calls for a while.

People rarely leave the Church because they study theology and decide that the Church is wrong on some doctrine. People usually leave the Church because they have been hurt or are holding onto some sin. I doubt he’s really interested in the questions he raises.

-Tim-

 

[Traci]

There are two important concepts when discussing the Incarnation, and if we are clear about these concepts, then I think you will “pass the reason test.”

The concepts are nature and person. In the Incarnation, Jesus has two natures (human and divine), but he is one person. Think of the movie Avatar. The main character (I forgot his name) is one person but has two natures (human and Naavi).

Help any?

Shoot…I haven’t seen Avatar

 

[Traci]

“Any organization that claims infallibility in anything is actually completely fallible.”

Is he claiming infallibility, here? Sounds like it. If so, it is self-refuting.

Great point…! I completely missed that!

 

[Traci]

By claiming you are not knowledgeable enough to deal with more than one topic at a time. Infallibility is a very different topic and the subject of the Incarnation hasn’t been resolved. Until this is resolved none of the othe “Catholic” stuff that he brings up can be resolved, as much of Catholic teaching depends on God becoming man.

Another good point. I am getting the feeling that he is mocking me and he doesn’t really care about any of this He is a fallen away Catholic and the fact that he opened this type of dialogue was really encouraging I thought maybe I could plant some seeds or at least correct some of the false interpretations of Church teaching that he holds.

I responded to him and basically told him that if he was just going to keep bringing up new things and wasn’t going to respond to my comments and questions on the first things he brought up that I wasn’t going to play any more. I went back to the basic question and again asked him if he even believed in God in the first place. We’ll see what he comes back with but if he does I am going to take your advice and just pick one topic at a time. I feel like I am running around like a crazy woman trying to find responses to all his accusation and misrepresentations. It would be much less stressful to just pick one thing and go with it.

 

[Windfish]

Shoot…I haven’t seen Avatar

Wikipedia it, and my example should be more clear to you.

Basically, in the film, a human marine also has an alien body that he can inhabit through technology. He lies down in a chamber, and, somehow, his being “awakens” in this alien body. It is kind of like the Matrix in that way. Have you seen the Matrix? They have a human nature in the real world but a digital one in the Matrix - in both the real world and the Matrix, though, it is the same person.

In the same way, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity takes on a human nature in addition to his divine one - though, in both natures, he remains the same divine person.

 

[Traci]

Nah… Something else is going on. I wouldn’t play.

He’s not interested in how God can also be a man or infallibility or any other doctrine of the Church or matter of faith. He is using that as a smoke screen. Something about religion scared him off. He’s a former Catholic… I’ll bet he got hurt by the Church in the past or blames the Church somehow. It could have been an overly harsh priest. It could have been a family member that made him feel guilty about some sin. It might be, and this is quite common in our Catholics Come Home ministry, that he is holding some sin from his past or has some present habitual sin and feels there is only condmnation in the Church.

Change gears on him. Ask him about his childhood or about his past. When did he leave the Church? What was the reason? How long has he been away? That sort of thing. Stop discussing doctrine and discusss spiritual things like hope and forgiveness and love. He’ll bob and weave like a prize-fighter sayng that he “Just stopped believing” or that the Church is full of hypocrites. A sure sign is if he starts “The Church is too rich” argument or if he brings up the sex scandals. He might even go dark on you, just stop returning your emails and calls for a while.

People rarely leave the Church because they study theology and decide that the Church is wrong on some doctrine. People usually leave the Church because they have been hurt or are holding onto some sin. I doubt he’s really interested in the questions he raises.

-Tim-

Tim, what wonderful insight, that makes total sense, I can’t believe I missed that. I have mentioned to him before that I thought it was crazy that he could go from such a fervent Catholic upbringing to such unbelief! I have such a hard time understanding how that happens and since my husband and I are trying to raise two boys (and another on the way ) in the Catholic faith it terrifies me that it can go so bad. Anyway, my friend described this in one of his emails and I totally glossed right over it…

“An argument with an ardent catholic? I don’t think I’ve had one in a long time! I feel like I’m in high school writing an essay for one of my theology teachers. Every year we had to write the “was jesus a madman or god” one though. I am definitely the wrong person to discuss Catholicism with. Did you know that there was a saint buried at my grade school (canonized while I was there) and that the priests in my high school helped perform the most famous exorcism in US history and have secret files about it at the school??? Do you know how many times I’ve heard catholic doctrine??? ”

Thanks so much for your response, I am going to re-engage him and ask about his leaving the Church and see where it goes! You know I am in contact with many non-practicing Catholics or Catholics that have left the Church and many of them will discuss the faith very candidly with me but I never really know how to approach it. What is the Catholics Come Home ministry and how can I find out more information on that?

 

[Traci]

Wikipedia it, and my example should be more clear to you.

Basically, in the film, a human marine also has an alien body that he can inhabit through technology. He lies down in a chamber, and, somehow, his being “awakens” in this alien body. It is kind of like the Matrix in that way. Have you seen the Matrix? They have a human nature in the real world but a digital one in the Matrix - in both the real world and the Matrix, though, it is the same person.

In the same way, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity takes on a human nature in addition to his divine one - though, in both natures, he remains the same divine person.

Yeah, I am not really a sci-fi girl…I haven’t seen Matrix either But I think I understand what you are getting at by your descriptions

 

[Windfish]

Yeah, I am not really a sci-fi girl…I haven’t seen Matrix either But I think I understand what you are getting at by your descriptions

Have not seen the Matrix, either!??!

Talk to your husband please!

btw, with respect to your kids, in this world, you can expect your kids to question and challenge their faith. It could be a good thing if done with the right attitude and intent. Knowing how to respond as a parent is also a parent. Sometimes, remaining silent until they are ready to listen is better. But if they are ready to listen and you do not have something helpful to say, that’s no good, either! So, slowly but surely, I would prepare yourself. Read some apologetics. Theology. Philosophy. History. If you ever need book recommendations are some advice, I am sure we all can help. PM me any time.

 

[DarkNight]

The Incarnation:
Why God Wanted to Become Human
A Franciscan View

Hundreds of years later, in the Middle Ages, the question about Jesus was expressed very explicitly: Would the Son of God have become incarnate if humanity had not sinned? The great Dominican theologian St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) answered in the negative, viewing the Incarnation as a remedy for sin.

Another great philosopher and theologian, Franciscan John Duns Scotus (1266-1308), disagreed with Thomas’s emphasis on sin. Indeed, Duns Scotus boldly proclaimed and defended the primacy of the Incarnation. He based his view on the Scriptures and early theologians and on logic. He argued, for example,** that God’s supreme work, the Incarnation, had to be first and foremost in God’s mind. It could not be dependent on or occasioned by any action of humans, especially sin.**

Even more than logic, Duns Scotus emphasized divine love. God is love and created all life in order to communicate to creatures the fullness of divine love. The Incarnate Word is the foundation of the creative plan of God, the very reason for the existence of all creation. This emphasis on Christ as the center and cornerstone of all creation has become an essential dimension of Franciscan life and ministry.

Jesus is the quintessential human; we pale in comparison. God was always in humanity; it is we earthly humans who don’t recognize that God is within us. I am sorry I’m explaining this beautiful theology so poorly. Here is another link to help you understand what I am trying to say The Incarnation

Go with Love, Go with God

 

[Traci]

Have not seen the Matrix, either!??!

Talk to your husband please!

btw, with respect to your kids, in this world, you can expect your kids to question and challenge their faith. It could be a good thing if done with the right attitude and intent. Knowing how to respond as a parent is also a parent. Sometimes, remaining silent until they are ready to listen is better. But if they are ready to listen and you do not have something helpful to say, that’s no good, either! So, slowly but surely, I would prepare yourself. Read some apologetics. Theology. Philosophy. History. If you ever need book recommendations are some advice, I am sure we all can help. PM me any time.

LOL…he gets me to at least watch the Bourne series, that something huh

Thanks for your encouragement with the kiddos, I really appreciate it! I just hope that our children come to us when they have questions or start challenging the beliefs we’ve instill in them!

 

[Traci]

Well TimothyH, I think you hit the nail on the head. I asked why he left the Church and if he even still believed in God and this was his response…

"I think an organization such as a church or a government that claims infallibility, especially because it has special infallibility granted from god, in this case the (to-be-treated-with-reverence) holy spirit protecting the supernatural word of a scripture and the supernatural word of a magisterium, deserves to have a lot of mud slung at it and to be treated with humor. Especially when arguments are closed with god said so or the holy spirit preserves such and such or the scripture says so.

The jesuits, who love rationality, swung me on my way against believing in infallibility when i was fourteen or fifteen, i do think they did a great job of fostering open mindedness in their students, and a remarkable number of students began toying with atheism in their courses. In general they were terrific men and great teachers. I just don’t agree with the dogma. I’m mostly concerned with the effects of people believing in the infallibility of their religious views and how this effects society and government and legislation and foreign policy and wars and science and human rights. And i wonder if the good churches do outweighs the effects of infallible views and the misuse of scriptures and the conflict causing at all levels that many of these religions plague and have always plagued society with. These are not really questions of religions helping individual souls (if supernatural souls exist).

Don’t be so nosy about if i believe in god."

I think I need to think and pray a little bit before I respond! I am not sure where to go with this now…

Thanks everyone for all your responses and insights

 

[UnityofTrinity]

If given that God is an omnipotent, omniscient God, why can’t one of the Persons in the Trinity become man and lived as man, yet remain 100% God? I fail to see why a God who create and destroy everything just by His will can’t do something like that simple.