Apparently this is Tass and Jimmy's new debate strategy: to repeatedly make the same bald assertion without elaborating or interacting with counter arguments.
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostApparently this is Tass and Jimmy's new debate strategy: to repeatedly make the same bald assertion without elaborating or interacting with counter arguments.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostApparently this is Tass and Jimmy's new debate strategy: to repeatedly make the same bald assertion without elaborating or interacting with counter arguments.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostApparently this is Tass and Jimmy's new debate strategy: to repeatedly make the same bald assertion without elaborating or interacting with counter arguments.
They are among those that believe that if they make an assertion that in and by itself counts as evidence and by simply repeating themselves they are providing corroborating evidence.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post"not being omniscient" isn't a necessary "quality" of being a human.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostThat's not the argument. The Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union claims that Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood, are inseparably joined together in one person. That's fine as a theological statement to be believed as a matter of faith, but it remains a logical contradiction nevertheless.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostIf it's not the argument then why did you word it as if it was?
.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostI worded it as posted, namely: "The Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union claims that two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood, are inseparably joined together in one person"; it is a 'faith statement', not a logical one.
.
Originally posted by Tassman View PostOne cannot reconcile being omniscient (divine) with not being omniscient (human) in one person. Ultimately it is simply a theological assertion believed by Christians as a revealed truth of the Church.
Which is silly of course, because the lack of something, such as omniscience, or omnipotence, isn't what makes humans humans. The only reason you believe God cannot assume a full human nature and still be fully God is because you wrongly assume that this is the case. If we take omniscience for example, it's not true at all that you can't reconcile being omniscient with being a human. The reason we as humans aren't omniscient isn't because we're humans, but because we're not God. If God chose to assume a human form there would be no conflict between His omniscience and any "non-omniscience" attribute intrinsic to humanity, simply because no such attribute exists that could come into conflict with His omniscience.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostThey are two totally different things and yet . "The Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union claims that two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood, are inseparably joined together in one person". This is a logical contradiction; it is a 'faith statement', not a logical one.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostNo, the doctrine does not claim that at all. You will not find a single orthodox expression of the hypostatic union that states that the two natures are united into one (single nature), including the part from the Westminster Confession of Faith that you cited. The two natures are joined together in one single person (Jesus), but they're not "fused" together into one single nature.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostI don't think that's what Tassman is trying to say. What you put in bold is Tassman's restatement of what follows; by "one" he obviously means "one person", not "one fused nature." I agree with him that the concept is not something which is amenable to rationalist logic. It is logically worked out from the consistent interpretation of scripture, and it is an article of faith that it is so without being able to understand precisely how it is so. God is, after all, ultimately beyond our limited human understanding.
I disagree that it's not amenable to "rationalist logic". That would mean that it would be possible to demonstrate that the concept involves a logical contradiction, something no one has ever been able to do. We might not be able to understand how it works, but that doesn't mean it goes contrary to logic.Last edited by JonathanL; 01-16-2019, 07:17 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI disagree that it's not amenable to "rationalist logic". That would mean that it would be possible to demonstrate that the concept involves a logical contradiction, something no one has ever been able to do. We might not be able to understand how it works, but that doesn't mean it goes contrary to logic.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 06-15-2024, 09:43 AM
|
8 responses
70 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 05:25 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
468 responses
2,122 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-05-2024, 04:09 AM | ||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-04-2024, 05:06 AM
|
254 responses
1,245 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 05-22-2024, 12:21 PM | ||
Started by whag, 01-18-2024, 01:35 PM
|
53 responses
419 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-11-2024, 11:01 AM |
Comment