Hacker News Reader

Comment by stevezsa8 | Hacker News Reader

A friend of mine raised an interesting question a few years back.

If Jesus was godly and perfect all the time, he'd basically be an unemotional miracle engine who could do no wrong.

If he was human but with access to godly powers... would be interesting to know about his mistakes and failings. Like a time he cured a sick man, and this man turned out to be a crook or something.

This was a pub conversation. I'm no theologian, so apologies if the topic is already dealt with in the religious texts.

View on HN

You might find the notion of the stoic “sage” interesting. It’s more or less the impossible manifestation of perfect human virtues in one human being; something akin to being a perfect human all the time, though not godly.

It wasn’t thought that a Sage would be emotionless at all, but would actually embrace emotions fully. They would just be the ideal emotions to express for the given circumstance.

It’s a far-fetched idea but the case for emotion being unnecessary is refuted well by stoicism and other philosophies (in my opinion). I think the idea that a perfect entity would feel nothing may be inspired by the fact that as humans, we’re often victims of our own emotions and we fear how they can control us. In reality, they’re a useful tool of expression, positive reinforcement, and communication. The only problem is when they aren’t the product of careful reflection and ongoing consideration.

The question is definitely interesting. I'm no theologian either, but I do wonder if that sort of "humanizing" via imperfection would actually appeal a lot to people who already want an anthropomorphic relationship with spirituality anyway.

> Like a time he cured a sick man, and this man turned out to be a crook or something.

Can't resist nitpicking your example, though. If he did this, he'd have something in common with plenty of folks who took the Hippocratic oath. ;) And I bet they'd all say it's not a mistake at all.

You're talking about the dude famous for the command "love your enemy" and fraternizing with all kinds of "unsavory" people. He would absolutely not regard healing a crook as a mistake. It's a little alarming that you would.

Ed: not to mention the fact that, canonically anyway, he would definitely know in advance who/what they were.

I wasn't making any claims about what I would do.

Maybe I can better phrase my example..

Would Jesus heal a super sick / dying man who Jesus knew is gonna murder like 10 people as soon as he's better?

The thought problem in my example was about curing a person who will commit a serious crime in the future only after being healed enough to commit this crime. And the supernatural healer having this foreknowledge.

Some topics/concepts which might interest you; links are to articles from the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, which is generally a solid resource for exploring Christian theology and religion, albeit from a thoroughly Roman Catholic perspective:

Hypostatic Union: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07610b.htm

The Incarnation: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm

Communicatio Idiomatum: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04169a.htm

[...]

Interesting, maybe, but ... next time drop an email address or indicate some other way to contact you that's within your personal comfort zone re: sharing in a comment on HN, while also indicating that you have some software ideas you'd like to explore. I imagine most users on HN would prefer that approach, but I could be wrong.

No, thanks. I've removed the offending content. Sorry for the bother.

It wasn't particularly offensive nor bothersome, your comments just seemed out of place and the kind of thing that should be preceded by a private query as to whether the other person is interested in entertaining your proposal/s.

In the Apocrypha, an angry child Jesus is said to have pushed a playmate off of something high, killing him. Had to pull a bailout miracle

Reply on news.ycombinator.com