Author Topic: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it  (Read 6182 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Maria

  • Boldly Proclaiming True Orthodox Christianity
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,023
  • O most Holy Theotokos, save us.
    • Saint Euphrosynos Cafe Discussion Forum
  • Faith: TrueGenuine Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: GOC under Archbishop Stephanos
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #90 on: October 30, 2015, 04:19:02 PM »
After all, what is more important? Whether God cannot cannot lift a rock, or whether He can lift any? Of course, it's whether He can lift any rock. That's what glorifies Him. Or, is the fact that God cannot be evil a limitation? Not at all, but a quality. Yet, God has made at least one "rock" He cannot lift and that is the human free will which is man's alone. God has already accomplished all things possible and impossible, but not in the way that we would prescribe for Him.

Except that qualities are limitations.  If you want to set up that God has no limitations, a better line of argument, then, would be that God has no qualities.

If I have the quality of being human, these means by definition that I do not have the quality of being a dog (and consequently, cannot - truly - act like a dog; I cannot act like a dog because I am limited, by the quality of being human, from thinking as a dog thinks and feeling as a dog feels - the most I can hope for is to imitate the dog).  If I have the quality of being a good person, to such an extent that I cannot do wrong, then I am limited from doing wrong.  Even if wrong is also defined as a quality (that is, that no act in itself is 'wrong' but rather that 'wrong' is a state of being, or an extension of a state of being) I am still limited, and unable to be wrong, if the qualities of 'wrong' and 'good' are incompatible.

To say that God has the quality of being good is to say that God cannot have the quality being evil.  God is, then limited.

Not having attributes that are negative is not a limitation because negative attributes are by definition limiting while good attributes are by definition infinite.  We have to take into account the quality of attributes, not only the quantity.

So are actions not inherently evil?  That is, is there no action which is evil, that evil is only a quality?

All our actions fall short of the glory of God.
We sin day and night because we miss the mark by failing to accept the best good.
Only God is the Ever Sinless One.
The memory of God should be treasured in our hearts like the precious pearl mentioned in the Holy Gospel. Our life's goal should be to nurture and contemplate God always within, and never let it depart, for this steadfastness will drive demons away from us. - Paraphrased from St. Philotheus of Sinai
Writings from the Philokalia: On Prayer of the Heart,
Translated from the Russian by E. Kadloubovksy and G.E.H. Palmer, Faber and Faber, London, Boston, 1992 printing.

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #91 on: October 30, 2015, 04:21:27 PM »
God does not exist in the sense that He could possibly not exist. God exists in the sense that God IS. I tend to agree with those who say that anthropomorphic understandings of God's mode of being or what He can do are flawed. God can only be approached through mystery and His mode of being is infinitely transcendent (unreachable by intellect). God is not concerned about whether we can prove that He exists or not, but how we relate to Him. There is evidence of God, but not proof. Evidence means that God has already revealed Himself. Proof means our intellect can discern God's transcendence which it cannot. God couldn't care less about whether He make a rock He cannot lift. God only cares about what He actually wants to do which is sufficient because He is God and everything He does is perfect. God is simple, but the human intellect makes Him complicated by trying to discern Him instead of relating to Him as He is.

There's a problem with the idea that God's "mode of being" is "infinitely transcendent."  The Incarnation.

But God did not take human form in order to limit Himself, but to transfigure His human nature in an infinite way. Christ is Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine.

Christ is neither Divinely Human nor Humanly Divine.  Christ is the God-Man and Man-God.  He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human, simultaneously, without confusion, intermingling, or consumption of one nature by the other.  To say that he is "Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine' is to say that the Incarnation is really just the Logos putting on flesh, as though it were a garment.  That is heresy that undermines the very basics of the understanding of Christology, which can be found in On the Incarnation.

And does it matter if God took "human form in order to limit Himself?"  Does the reason God took human form necessarily limit the effect of taking human form?  (And, here, I would re-iterate, that God did not 'take human form;' that's blasphemy and heresy: God became Man.)

Christ is only God-Man, not Man-God. And it is capital G and capital M at that. Man is man-god, small m and small g. God did not become man in the sense that man is man, but in the sense that He took on a human nature that is His alone and that He transfigures without intermingling.
It might help if you define this term "Man-God" so we can understand how you're using this term, how it differs from "God-Man", and why Jesus is only the latter but not the former. Otherwise, I fear that you're merely talking past your audience.

God-Man means that Christ is primarily Divine/God and secondarily Human, that His Divine nature leads His Human one. He has both, but in a certain order. Man-God would mean the opposite -- being primarily Human and secondarily Divine.

So Christ is not equally Man and God, which would mean that his human nature is subsumed in his Divine nature, and therefore he is not human?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #92 on: October 30, 2015, 04:27:45 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.
Don't make such rude assumptions, Maria.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Theophania

  • Ecumenical Dissipation Association *OF* America
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,812
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #93 on: October 30, 2015, 04:31:29 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.

Haven't you ever read Nathaniel Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown?
Most high school or college students have read this short story of the shapeshifting devil.
http://www.online-literature.com/poe/158/

You have no idea what my education consisted of, Maria. Your reply was bizarre, thus my "what?"
It's common knowledge that you secretly want to be born in early 17th century Russia.  As a serf or a royal, I know not.  Chances are serf.

Offline Maria

  • Boldly Proclaiming True Orthodox Christianity
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,023
  • O most Holy Theotokos, save us.
    • Saint Euphrosynos Cafe Discussion Forum
  • Faith: TrueGenuine Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: GOC under Archbishop Stephanos
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #94 on: October 30, 2015, 04:32:45 PM »
God does not exist in the sense that He could possibly not exist. God exists in the sense that God IS. I tend to agree with those who say that anthropomorphic understandings of God's mode of being or what He can do are flawed. God can only be approached through mystery and His mode of being is infinitely transcendent (unreachable by intellect). God is not concerned about whether we can prove that He exists or not, but how we relate to Him. There is evidence of God, but not proof. Evidence means that God has already revealed Himself. Proof means our intellect can discern God's transcendence which it cannot. God couldn't care less about whether He make a rock He cannot lift. God only cares about what He actually wants to do which is sufficient because He is God and everything He does is perfect. God is simple, but the human intellect makes Him complicated by trying to discern Him instead of relating to Him as He is.

There's a problem with the idea that God's "mode of being" is "infinitely transcendent."  The Incarnation.

But God did not take human form in order to limit Himself, but to transfigure His human nature in an infinite way. Christ is Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine.

Christ is neither Divinely Human nor Humanly Divine.  Christ is the God-Man and Man-God.  He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human, simultaneously, without confusion, intermingling, or consumption of one nature by the other.  To say that he is "Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine' is to say that the Incarnation is really just the Logos putting on flesh, as though it were a garment.  That is heresy that undermines the very basics of the understanding of Christology, which can be found in On the Incarnation.

And does it matter if God took "human form in order to limit Himself?"  Does the reason God took human form necessarily limit the effect of taking human form?  (And, here, I would re-iterate, that God did not 'take human form;' that's blasphemy and heresy: God became Man.)

Christ is only God-Man, not Man-God. And it is capital G and capital M at that. Man is man-god, small m and small g. God did not become man in the sense that man is man, but in the sense that He took on a human nature that is His alone and that He transfigures without intermingling.

If Christ "took on a human nature that is His alone" then he is not human. 

You've undermined the entirety of Christology, that is, On the Incarnation by St. Athanasius.  "God became Man that Man might become God."

God became man (by nature) so that man might become God (by grace).

Christ God took on human nature which was uniquely His own because all human beings have their own uniqueness. I am not speaking theologically, but from what we humans now know about DNA.

It was not accidental that God chose Mary who was raised by devout Hebrew parents, St. Joachim and St. Anna, and then was raised in the Temple to prepare her to be the Theotokos.
The memory of God should be treasured in our hearts like the precious pearl mentioned in the Holy Gospel. Our life's goal should be to nurture and contemplate God always within, and never let it depart, for this steadfastness will drive demons away from us. - Paraphrased from St. Philotheus of Sinai
Writings from the Philokalia: On Prayer of the Heart,
Translated from the Russian by E. Kadloubovksy and G.E.H. Palmer, Faber and Faber, London, Boston, 1992 printing.

Offline Maria

  • Boldly Proclaiming True Orthodox Christianity
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,023
  • O most Holy Theotokos, save us.
    • Saint Euphrosynos Cafe Discussion Forum
  • Faith: TrueGenuine Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: GOC under Archbishop Stephanos
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #95 on: October 30, 2015, 04:38:37 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.

Haven't you ever read Nathaniel Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown?
Most high school or college students have read this short story of the shapeshifting devil.
http://www.online-literature.com/poe/158/

You have no idea what my education consisted of, Maria. Your reply was bizarre, thus my "what?"

"What" is a bizarre answer. We were taught that it is impolite to respond with "What, Who, Why, When, Where, Which, How."
In other words, ask your question using a complete sentence with a
[Who/What/Why/When/Which/When/How] + [verb] +[noun] + [verb]  ...

Basic English
« Last Edit: October 30, 2015, 04:39:45 PM by Maria »
The memory of God should be treasured in our hearts like the precious pearl mentioned in the Holy Gospel. Our life's goal should be to nurture and contemplate God always within, and never let it depart, for this steadfastness will drive demons away from us. - Paraphrased from St. Philotheus of Sinai
Writings from the Philokalia: On Prayer of the Heart,
Translated from the Russian by E. Kadloubovksy and G.E.H. Palmer, Faber and Faber, London, Boston, 1992 printing.

Offline Theophania

  • Ecumenical Dissipation Association *OF* America
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,812
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #96 on: October 30, 2015, 04:40:00 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.

Haven't you ever read Nathaniel Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown?
Most high school or college students have read this short story of the shapeshifting devil.
http://www.online-literature.com/poe/158/

You have no idea what my education consisted of, Maria. Your reply was bizarre, thus my "what?"

"What" is a bizarre answer. We were taught that it is impolite to respond with "What, Who, Why, When, Where, Which, How."
In other words, ask your question using a complete sentence with a
[Who/What/Why/When/Which/When/How] + [verb] +[noun] + [verb]

"I will not return the attack"
It's common knowledge that you secretly want to be born in early 17th century Russia.  As a serf or a royal, I know not.  Chances are serf.

Offline ZealousZeal

  • Cosmic Knowledge Fish
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,980
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #97 on: October 30, 2015, 04:50:48 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.

Haven't you ever read Nathaniel Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown?
Most high school or college students have read this short story of the shapeshifting devil.
http://www.online-literature.com/poe/158/



I've never heard of that story in all of my life.
You want your belt to buckle, not your chair.

Offline DeniseDenise

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,799
  • This place holds to nothing....
  • Faith: Does it matter?
  • Jurisdiction: Unverifiable, so irrelevant
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #98 on: October 30, 2015, 04:57:42 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.

Haven't you ever read Nathaniel Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown?
Most high school or college students have read this short story of the shapeshifting devil.
http://www.online-literature.com/poe/158/

You have no idea what my education consisted of, Maria. Your reply was bizarre, thus my "what?"

"What" is a bizarre answer. We were taught that it is impolite to respond with "What, Who, Why, When, Where, Which, How."
In other words, ask your question using a complete sentence with a
[Who/What/Why/When/Which/When/How] + [verb] +[noun] + [verb]  ...

Basic English


Don't play teacher when people are not your students.


Basic Courtesy
All opinions expressed by myself are quite tragically my own, and not those of any other poster or wall hangings.

Offline Theophania

  • Ecumenical Dissipation Association *OF* America
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,812
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #99 on: October 30, 2015, 04:59:39 PM »
Can God make a polygon that is both a square and a triangle?
Yes

That would not be God, but the devil, as he is the shapeshifter.

What?

That is a very impolite response, Kelly, and a sign of not being properly educated.

Haven't you ever read Nathaniel Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown?
Most high school or college students have read this short story of the shapeshifting devil.
http://www.online-literature.com/poe/158/

You have no idea what my education consisted of, Maria. Your reply was bizarre, thus my "what?"

"What" is a bizarre answer. We were taught that it is impolite to respond with "What, Who, Why, When, Where, Which, How."
In other words, ask your question using a complete sentence with a
[Who/What/Why/When/Which/When/How] + [verb] +[noun] + [verb]  ...

Basic English


Don't play teacher when people are not your students.


Basic Courtesy

lo! my feeble brain wast not able to comprehend the intricacies of your post.
It's common knowledge that you secretly want to be born in early 17th century Russia.  As a serf or a royal, I know not.  Chances are serf.

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #100 on: October 30, 2015, 05:07:28 PM »
God does not exist in the sense that He could possibly not exist. God exists in the sense that God IS. I tend to agree with those who say that anthropomorphic understandings of God's mode of being or what He can do are flawed. God can only be approached through mystery and His mode of being is infinitely transcendent (unreachable by intellect). God is not concerned about whether we can prove that He exists or not, but how we relate to Him. There is evidence of God, but not proof. Evidence means that God has already revealed Himself. Proof means our intellect can discern God's transcendence which it cannot. God couldn't care less about whether He make a rock He cannot lift. God only cares about what He actually wants to do which is sufficient because He is God and everything He does is perfect. God is simple, but the human intellect makes Him complicated by trying to discern Him instead of relating to Him as He is.

There's a problem with the idea that God's "mode of being" is "infinitely transcendent."  The Incarnation.

But God did not take human form in order to limit Himself, but to transfigure His human nature in an infinite way. Christ is Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine.

Christ is neither Divinely Human nor Humanly Divine.  Christ is the God-Man and Man-God.  He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human, simultaneously, without confusion, intermingling, or consumption of one nature by the other.  To say that he is "Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine' is to say that the Incarnation is really just the Logos putting on flesh, as though it were a garment.  That is heresy that undermines the very basics of the understanding of Christology, which can be found in On the Incarnation.

And does it matter if God took "human form in order to limit Himself?"  Does the reason God took human form necessarily limit the effect of taking human form?  (And, here, I would re-iterate, that God did not 'take human form;' that's blasphemy and heresy: God became Man.)

Christ is only God-Man, not Man-God. And it is capital G and capital M at that. Man is man-god, small m and small g. God did not become man in the sense that man is man, but in the sense that He took on a human nature that is His alone and that He transfigures without intermingling.

If Christ "took on a human nature that is His alone" then he is not human. 

You've undermined the entirety of Christology, that is, On the Incarnation by St. Athanasius.  "God became Man that Man might become God."

God became man (by nature) so that man might become God (by grace).

Christ God took on human nature which was uniquely His own because all human beings have their own uniqueness. I am not speaking theologically, but from what we humans now know about DNA.

It was not accidental that God chose Mary who was raised by devout Hebrew parents, St. Joachim and St. Anna, and then was raised in the Temple to prepare her to be the Theotokos.

This denies the understanding of nature used by the Fathers.  I'm not certain if you're actually meaning to contribute to this discussion.  But regardless, Christ's human nature was not unique.  If it was unique he was not human.  Do not confuse nature with DNA (which, I'd point out, is almost entirely the same between all people).
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,880
  • I am the Provisional Supreme Church Authority
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #101 on: October 30, 2015, 05:20:12 PM »
OC.NET is full of temptations, but in temptations we are enforced, remember about the thread "Temptation in the Desert: Rachel Weisz and the Undoing of Mor Ephrem". OC.NET helps in becoming unpassionate.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Offline Maria

  • Boldly Proclaiming True Orthodox Christianity
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,023
  • O most Holy Theotokos, save us.
    • Saint Euphrosynos Cafe Discussion Forum
  • Faith: TrueGenuine Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: GOC under Archbishop Stephanos
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #102 on: October 30, 2015, 05:21:13 PM »
You could follow your own advice, Denise.

Furthermore, I am starting another thread: The Devil as a Shapeshifter.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,66849.new.html#new
The memory of God should be treasured in our hearts like the precious pearl mentioned in the Holy Gospel. Our life's goal should be to nurture and contemplate God always within, and never let it depart, for this steadfastness will drive demons away from us. - Paraphrased from St. Philotheus of Sinai
Writings from the Philokalia: On Prayer of the Heart,
Translated from the Russian by E. Kadloubovksy and G.E.H. Palmer, Faber and Faber, London, Boston, 1992 printing.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #103 on: October 31, 2015, 01:01:44 AM »
You could follow your own advice, Denise.
LOL! :laugh:
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,826
  • Excelsior
    • Archive of Our Own works
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #104 on: October 31, 2015, 01:11:45 AM »
https://archiveofourown.org/users/Parakeetist/works Warning: stories have mature content.

"Some people only feel good when they are praising the Lord." - Coptic bishop

Mt. 21:31 Jesus said to them, ÔÇťAssuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you."

"Our Lord will *never* stop loving us." - Fr. Michael P.

Offline IoanC

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,468
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #105 on: October 31, 2015, 02:20:20 AM »
God does not exist in the sense that He could possibly not exist. God exists in the sense that God IS. I tend to agree with those who say that anthropomorphic understandings of God's mode of being or what He can do are flawed. God can only be approached through mystery and His mode of being is infinitely transcendent (unreachable by intellect). God is not concerned about whether we can prove that He exists or not, but how we relate to Him. There is evidence of God, but not proof. Evidence means that God has already revealed Himself. Proof means our intellect can discern God's transcendence which it cannot. God couldn't care less about whether He make a rock He cannot lift. God only cares about what He actually wants to do which is sufficient because He is God and everything He does is perfect. God is simple, but the human intellect makes Him complicated by trying to discern Him instead of relating to Him as He is.

There's a problem with the idea that God's "mode of being" is "infinitely transcendent."  The Incarnation.

But God did not take human form in order to limit Himself, but to transfigure His human nature in an infinite way. Christ is Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine.

Christ is neither Divinely Human nor Humanly Divine.  Christ is the God-Man and Man-God.  He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human, simultaneously, without confusion, intermingling, or consumption of one nature by the other.  To say that he is "Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine' is to say that the Incarnation is really just the Logos putting on flesh, as though it were a garment.  That is heresy that undermines the very basics of the understanding of Christology, which can be found in On the Incarnation.

And does it matter if God took "human form in order to limit Himself?"  Does the reason God took human form necessarily limit the effect of taking human form?  (And, here, I would re-iterate, that God did not 'take human form;' that's blasphemy and heresy: God became Man.)

Christ is only God-Man, not Man-God. And it is capital G and capital M at that. Man is man-god, small m and small g. God did not become man in the sense that man is man, but in the sense that He took on a human nature that is His alone and that He transfigures without intermingling.
It might help if you define this term "Man-God" so we can understand how you're using this term, how it differs from "God-Man", and why Jesus is only the latter but not the former. Otherwise, I fear that you're merely talking past your audience.

God-Man means that Christ is primarily Divine/God and secondarily Human, that His Divine nature leads His Human one. He has both, but in a certain order. Man-God would mean the opposite -- being primarily Human and secondarily Divine.
Is this a definition you constructed out of your own understanding of the Incarnation, or was this given to you?

I didn't construct it myself. It is orthodox theology, to the best of my knowledge of course.

Offline IoanC

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,468
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #106 on: October 31, 2015, 02:44:26 AM »
God does not exist in the sense that He could possibly not exist. God exists in the sense that God IS. I tend to agree with those who say that anthropomorphic understandings of God's mode of being or what He can do are flawed. God can only be approached through mystery and His mode of being is infinitely transcendent (unreachable by intellect). God is not concerned about whether we can prove that He exists or not, but how we relate to Him. There is evidence of God, but not proof. Evidence means that God has already revealed Himself. Proof means our intellect can discern God's transcendence which it cannot. God couldn't care less about whether He make a rock He cannot lift. God only cares about what He actually wants to do which is sufficient because He is God and everything He does is perfect. God is simple, but the human intellect makes Him complicated by trying to discern Him instead of relating to Him as He is.

There's a problem with the idea that God's "mode of being" is "infinitely transcendent."  The Incarnation.

But God did not take human form in order to limit Himself, but to transfigure His human nature in an infinite way. Christ is Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine.

Christ is neither Divinely Human nor Humanly Divine.  Christ is the God-Man and Man-God.  He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human, simultaneously, without confusion, intermingling, or consumption of one nature by the other.  To say that he is "Divinely Human, not Humanly Divine' is to say that the Incarnation is really just the Logos putting on flesh, as though it were a garment.  That is heresy that undermines the very basics of the understanding of Christology, which can be found in On the Incarnation.

And does it matter if God took "human form in order to limit Himself?"  Does the reason God took human form necessarily limit the effect of taking human form?  (And, here, I would re-iterate, that God did not 'take human form;' that's blasphemy and heresy: God became Man.)

Christ is only God-Man, not Man-God. And it is capital G and capital M at that. Man is man-god, small m and small g. God did not become man in the sense that man is man, but in the sense that He took on a human nature that is His alone and that He transfigures without intermingling.

If Christ "took on a human nature that is His alone" then he is not human. 

You've undermined the entirety of Christology, that is, On the Incarnation by St. Athanasius.  "God became Man that Man might become God."

He is Human, but not only Human. He is also Divine, at the same time, without confusion or intermingling (yet synergy between the two natures). Christ is not separately Divine and separately Human, but a union of both. Whereas man is only man, having only one nature. Man does not become god with a capital G, but small g. Man only shares the image and likeness of God and does not assume God's nature.

As well, Christ took on Human limitations in the beginning in order to redeem man, but then He ascended with his Human nature all the way to His heavenly throne. His Human nature sits on the eternal throne. Whereas man does not have the possibility of such ascension, of sitting on God's throne, but only ascends to heaven by Grace. That is why Christ's Human nature is the same as our human nature, but behaves in a different way according to His Divine nature. Christ is not a Divine Lord and an inferior human creature, but Divine with a Human nature (capital H).

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #107 on: October 31, 2015, 03:25:10 AM »
Have you read On the Incarnation?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #108 on: October 31, 2015, 03:38:02 AM »
Have you read On the Incarnation?

I highly reccommend the participants of this thread read it carefully, as well as St. Cyril, given some of the dubious Christological statements on this thread.  I also reccommend St. Psuedo-Dionysius the Aereopagite, St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzus, St. Gregory Palamas, any other Saint named Gregory, St. Irenaeus and a few other voices to provide improved insights into theology.
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #109 on: October 31, 2015, 03:49:39 AM »
For ease of reference, here's a link to St. Cyril's 'Scholia on the Incarnation of the Only-Begotten' http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/cyril_scholia_incarnation_01_text.htm

And here's one to St. Athanasius' 'On the Incarnation' http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius/incarnation.i.html
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #110 on: October 31, 2015, 12:10:37 PM »
Have you read On the Incarnation?
Have you?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: God cannot make a rock so heavy that He is unable to lift it
« Reply #111 on: October 31, 2015, 06:27:35 PM »
Have you read On the Incarnation?
Have you?

Actually yes, multiple times.  Along with a number of other patristic texts on the Incarnation.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011