G
Ghosty
Guest
If it was God’s will to make them in His image, yes, but it appears that such is not His will. Only humans are described as being in His “image and likeness”. That is by God’s will, not mine. What God wills, He wills, what God does not will is not. God specifically didn’t make rats and pigs to be compatible with His nature, though of course He could have since He made all things. The fact is that only humans were made this way, as He says so Himself in Genesis.Can the same be said if God became a rat or a pig?
In His human nature, yes, but that is not the same as applying human attributes to His Divine Nature. This is an important distinction, because Muslims try to blur the line and imply that we say that God, in His divine nature, must eat and sleep, but this is not the case, nor has the Church ever claimed this.Humans are in need of food. If God became a human as you claim he would need food and need to relieve himself.
So, you would be right to say that implying that Divine Nature requires eating and sleeping would be blasphemy and diminishing to God. You are wrong to say, however, that taking on a human nature IN ADDITION to a Divine Nature diminishes that Divine Nature. By taking on the human nature, God’s Divine Nature didn’t change at all, and we know that God designed the human nature to be compatible with His Divine Nature because He made us specifically in His image and likeness.
The term for this is Hypostatic Union. If you would honestly like a more detailed explaination of this, I would be happy to explain it. Just say so