Can we simply address this error of yours....? For if you could have the ability to understand most all would fall into place for you.
You say “Nothing can be 100% of two different things.”
That statement
IS philosophically false.
Things absolutely can be
100% of two things when the “things” are
different categories, not competing substances. Some Examples for you... nothing theological yet..........
A person can be
100% a father and
100% a son
A book can be
100% paper and
100% information
A human can be
100% biological and
100% personal
These are not contradictions because they answer different questions.
A contradiction is saying Jesus is 100% God and not God at the same time in the same respect.
That is not what Christians claim.
Do you even what the doctrine actually says ?
The doctrine
does NOT say... Jesus is one nature that is half divine and half human, nor Jesus is a blended nature
or Jesus is God in His humanity or human in His divinity
What it does say is.... One Person subsists in
two distinct natures — divine and human — without confusion, change, division, or separation.
"Two natures” does not mean “two beings” or “two minds fighting each other.” It means two complete sets of attributes united in one person.
Can you answer this.....? Why do you fight and object to the "laws of nature" so much?
Christianity does
not say the incarnation is a
natural event. In fact, it says it is a
supernatural act of God.
Do you disagree with the fact that God is not bound by the systems He created?
Appealing to “laws of nature” assumes God cannot act beyond nature of which is itself an unbiblical assumption.
Fact.. big
FACT If God cannot transcend nature,
creation itself is impossible.
Additionally, the
doctrine of the Trinity does not claim that Jesus is a "blend" or a "50/50" hybrid. Instead, it posits that one Person subsists in
two distinct natures ...divine and human....without the two being confused or divided.
You say “both natures would have to know about each other” as a claim is a non sequitur
Knowledge belongs to
persons, not natures. A “nature” does not “know” things —
persons do, according to the capacities of their nature.
Biblical example:
Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.....Jesus says He does not know the day or hour
John 2:25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man....Yet He knows what is in man
This is Not a contradiction but
different capacities, in the same person. It is scripture itself showing Jesus sometimes acting according to His humanity and sometimes according to His divinity. That distinction is explicitly biblical.
Question for you
@Peterlag .....
Do you accept everything Scripture says about Jesus, even when it forces conclusions you wouldn’t arrive at philosophically?
I ask because you seemingly rejects clear biblical data and you elevate human reasoning over revelation. Not to mention you do accuses Scripture of nonsense when it exceeds human categories
Restating some of the above......
The “dual nature” doctrine doesn’t claim Jesus is 100% God and 100% man in the same respect. That would be a contradiction. It claims one Person subsists in two distinct natures, which is not logically incoherent.
Scripture clearly teaches Jesus is truly God (Jn 1:1; Col 2:9) and truly human (Jn 1:14; Heb 2:17).
The doctrine exists because the Bible forces both conclusions at once.
Appealing to the “laws of nature” assumes God cannot act beyond nature, which would rule out creation itself. And “natures” don’t know things ... persons do, according to the capacities of their nature. Scripture itself shows Jesus sometimes acting according to His humanity and sometimes according to His divinity.
The real question is whether we allow Scripture to define Christ, or whether we reject what it teaches when it exceeds our philosophical comfort?
It is this latter point that I am fearful of where you hang your hat.
