[aNYCguy]

The Second Person of the Trinity, eternally existent Word of the Father omniscient, assumed a human nature etc. etc.

So yes: the Omniscient had to learn to say "Ma-ma."

Restating your self-contradictory thesis doesn't make it rational. Were you hoping to paraphrase nonsense until you came across some formulation which resonated with me?

Once again: "X and not X" is contradictory. Your claim that there has existed a being which is both omniscient and not omniscient is absurd on its face, and you have made no attempt to deal with this other than offering gems to the effect of "Dude, life is a paradox."

Since you seem to be a real postmodernist, I suppose that doesn't bother you, and there's no point in discussion. Don't be surprised, however, when you meet people who won't listen to your "thinking is overrated" and be impressed.

[Mrs. Don-o]

The doctrine of the Incarnation does not ignore or violate the law of contradiction (x cannot equal non-x.) That law says that a proposition and its contrary cannot both the true at the same time, to the same degree and in the same manner.

This logical law is not violated in Jesus Christ, because he has two natures, Divine and human.

A reasonable analogy would be, say, that a virus can be alive and not-alive: not-alive because it has no cytoplasm, cell menbrane, mitochondia or organelles, it has no power of respiration, no way to absorb nutrition, and it does not grow; yet it is in another sense alive because it can use the DNA of another cell to replicate itself.

In the Incarnation of Christ, you have two different natures in one person: natures which are not confused and do not mix. So in one sense He is divine, omniscient, without beginning or end, and outside of time and space; and in another sense He is human, a learner like we are, came into being at conception, and subject to the plodding and confining limitations of time and space.

This is unprecendented; this is astonishing; but this does not violate the laws of reason.

As for "postmodernism" --- ha. Far from it. You are apparently unfamiliar with the way that wrestling with the concept of Christ's person and natures, played a seminal role in the development of Western Civilizations's concept of personhood.

Your verbal scorn makes it difficult to engage in an exchange of information. If you would be so reasonable as to look into the actual doctrine, you would not be so contemptuous.