#824 To Err is Human
February 26, 2023Hello Dr. Craig,
I am a recent convert to Christ from India. I have been following your videos (especially your debates) for quite some time, in fact since well before I came to Christ.
My question: What you say in a lot of your lectures (and what is also a very basic concept in Christian theology) is that Christ is one in person, but has two natures: one divine, and one human, that is he is fully man and fully God- it is due to His human nature that he needed to eat, drink, sleep, etc. Now, my question is, if His human nature created these weaknesses in Him, doesn't that mean He could (at least theoretically) be wrong about some things? Like, doesn't that mean He isn't necessary infallible, and could unintentionally teach some things that are factually incorrect?
Siddhartha
India
Dr. craig’s response
A
I’m thrilled to learn of your recent conversion to Christ, Siddhartha! Be prepared for hard times ahead, as you will face trials.
Yes, ever since his virginal conception by Mary, Christ is one person possessing two natures, human and divine, and therefore truly man and truly God (a more accurate formulation than your “fully man and fully God”). In virtue of his being human, he shared in the various weaknesses inherent in human nature. But while to err is human, it does not follow that to be human is to err. Error, like sin, is not an essential property of being human. Since Christ is a divine person, he is omniscient and therefore cannot, even theoretically, “be wrong about some things.” So we can’t say that he was inerrant in his divine nature but errant in his human nature, as we can say that he is omnipotent in his divine nature but weak in his human nature, because omniscience is a property of persons, and there is no human person in Christ, only a divine person. If Christ could err with respect to his human nature, then Christ could err—which is impossible for an omniscient person. So we can have confidence that whatever Jesus taught is true.
- William Lane Craig