People say, for instance, God "cannot" lie, suggesting that that is a lack of ability or power. What happens if I rephrase it thus: God cannot want to lie.
My point, if any, is that God's utter reliability (not limited to making it rains right after I wash the car) maybe ought not to be thought of or expressed as a limitation on His power. Maybe.
Saying, "It just couldn't happen," is one thing. I want to suggest the substitution of "It just wouldn't happen," to see if the conversation develops helpfully.
In the "agony" in the Garden (in quotes because the root sense of "agony" is struggle, not pain) we are presented with the real, live, Son of God, seeming to suggest to the Father that it would be okay with the Son if the Father could come up with another way to get the job done. That is a mysterious indication of the union and distinctness of persons, I guess. Jesus can entertain the possibility that there might be a way out of this, although he explicitly rejects doing something other than the Father's will.
But again, there's the problem of speaking about His obedience as though it were a limitation rather than an accomplishment. If it were me in the garden, I'd probably say, "Get yourself another boy, I'm outta here," but that would be my failure.
So is freedom a failure?
IN related news: Does it matter, kosta, the the so-called Athanasian Creed says "inferior to the Father as touching His manhood?"
"Begotten" is such interesting language. ON the one hand, like begets like, so that Son is the same "kind of thing" as the Father. But still certainly we resonate to some extent with the idea that that which begets is in some sense "prior" to that which is begotten, don't we?
If I were having the discussion you two are having, I'd pick me way very carefully through it and have frequent recourse to that very Catholic language, "in a special way ...."
I would say that is also correct, but not a replacement for "God cannot lie". In both cases, God so doing would be for Him to act wholly in contradiction to His pure nature. I don't think that is possible. In addition, if we say that all power everywhere in the universe comes originally from God, then by definition, He cannot lack any of it. IOW, we could ask "does God lack the power to become satan?". We would answer "no, but God cannot become satan, or else, He wouldn't be God. He would be ....... something else".
I understand what you mean by "wouldn't" and that is also true. Perhaps it just comes down to who God is on a definitional level. If He is defined as unchangeable and sinless, then He can't sin. I think God supports both of those definitions in His Holy word.
[On Jesus asking for the cup to be taken away:] But again, there's the problem of speaking about His obedience as though it were a limitation rather than an accomplishment. If it were me in the garden, I'd probably say, "Get yourself another boy, I'm outta here," but that would be my failure.
I suppose I don't see it that way. Jesus was 100% man, and the instinct of men is self-preservation. He showed the instinct, and His accomplishment was in the surpassing of it by overcoming it. No limitation at all. :)