In my last post I pointed out that when it comes to formulating a doctrine, the Church’s methodology is no different from that of any individual: A text is read and interpreted. Where there are differences of opinion there is discussion, followed by agreement and declaration.
You have presented a text from Philippians 2, and have declared your doctrine; namely that: ‘God became incorruptible, godly, perfect flesh, which does not affect His immutability in any way.’
On the 11th of September I asked how a being could be both ‘wholly God’ and ‘wholly man’ at one and the same time.
On the 13th of September you wrote that: ‘
God is immutable,
unchangeable…’
On the 20th of September you confirmed your belief that: ‘God is immutable, in that He never changes.’
You now say that you ‘don't see (my) definition for immutable in the scripture’. As a matter of fact, my definition of ‘immutable’ is precisely the same as yours.
Having said that God is ‘immutable, unchangeable’ you contradict yourself by saying that He became a human being, in the form of Christ.
It really doesn’t matter whether God became an entire human body (as the Church teaches), or just a brain (as you appear to believe). If it is true that God (absolute spirit as regards to His very substance) is immutable, then He simply
cannot become non-spirit; not even a single atom; not even a quark. To say that He did so is nonsense. And to say that He ‘became incorruptible, godly, perfect flesh, (
without affecting) His immutability in any way’ is heaping nonsense on nonsense.
You cannot have it both ways. If God is immutable, then He
cannot become flesh. If He became flesh then He is
not immutable.
How can Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) be both God and man at one and the same time? He can’t. Here’s why:
If we define ‘man’ as a member of the species homo-sapiens, with various physical and mental limitations, then we distinguish ‘man’ from ‘God’. If Yeshua is ‘wholly man’ then he cannot possibly be wholly not-man (God) at one and the same time and in the same relationship to what defines a man. If we insist that he is indeed both ‘man’
and ‘God’ – and if we preserve the integrity of the definitions of both these terms – then we make him a logical contradiction.
The thing about logical contradictions is that they are
never true. They are always false, because the real world never satisfies both a statement and its negation at the same time, simply by the meaning of negation.
To believe in a logical contradiction is to believe a lie. The puzzle is, why do so many Christian do just this?
The answer lies in George Orwell’s concept of ‘doublethink’. According to Orwell, ‘doublethink’ is:
‘The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them; to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed; to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies…. and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.’ (‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’; part 2, Chapter 9).
The doctrine of the incarnation owes its very existence to the power of ‘doublethink’.
No matter how hard it is pushed; no matter how often it is repeated; a lie remains a lie.
Let me be clear –
very clear – about this: When a Trinitarian tells me that Yeshua is both God and man he speaking a lie; but he is
not a liar. A liar is someone who sets out to deceive; who makes a statement in the full knowledge that it is false. Trinitarians are
not doing this. They really
do believe that what they are saying is true.
This is ‘doublethink’ in action.
Have a good day.