Logical contradictions?

[RAD]

I understand that you are trying to rationalise the dogma with the contradiction. But you are not only paying an intellectual price for doing do it just can't be the case. The reason is you are staing Jesus became a god and was therefore not eternal and not fully a god. Even of this were possible he would have needed to become infinite and immaterial which he didn't even after death because he was bodily resurrected and therefore still material. I'm afraid this does not reslve the contradiction. Which if I précis it is: Jesus could not be fully man (limited) and fully god (unlimited) and therefore chrstianity is founded on a fallacy and is false.

Isn't it ironic that I'm trying to answer a question sincerely and it is you who is basically picking nits over definitions? Should I become an atheist now because Jesus grew in his understanding and omniscience? Why should I care how and when he became fully God? Obviously, he either wasn't omnipotent or did not choose to be omnipotent before he was killed, and he certainly wasn't "God" as a child because it says he "grew in wisdom and stature"

What if God is just 8 million times wiser and more benevolent than you are but not "perfect" in your eyes? How foolish is it to wait for a better one?

Like I told another atheist, suppose Jesus came back and healed 82% of all the terminally ill people in all the hospitals? You'll do what? Complain?

---

I think a lot of comments are valid, but this thread was set up to address a logical contradiction which I would assert falsified Christianity in that it is not possible for Jesus (assuming he existed) to be fully god and fully man. All theist claims to reconcile this on this thread have so far appealed to mysticism, unfounded speculation or logically invalid assertions. Formally the argument is simple:

p1 christian theism asserts god is an immaterial, eternal, unlimited personal being that dwells in a supernatural realm
p2 a man is a finite, limited being that is bound in time and space
p3 Christian theism asserts Jesus was a man that was born and died
p4 if Christian theism is true then Jesus was fully man and fully god
c from p1,2,3,4 Christian theism is false

I did answer the dilemma. He was both at some point, or as close as any rational person should care about, but not always at the same time. I also pointed out how silly it is to care when he might have become "fully God." Your argument is a false dichotomy because it assumes he was both always, or nothing, and the New Testament does not claim he was both always. He had to grow in wisdom and he had to empty himself willingly.

---

Fair enough. So does this mean that Jesus became one with god or that he simply discovered the depth of his own ability?

Good question. I would answer the former because he said "of my own self, I can do nothing" and "the Father who dwells in me does the works."

I'm not sure what this transfiguration mean. I'm assuming that Jesus essentially becomes a half-god in a sense (gaining omnipotent power, as half of omnipotence is still omnipotence, I think).

Yeah what's half of infinity?

I wouldn't have wanted to take him on at age 12. I have a feeling almost everybody was starting to feel stupid around him by then (if they were still capable of recognizing their own stupidity)

Good questions/points.