Provide a detailed series of philosophical arguments against the Ratzinger–Nichols conception of transubstantiation in the Eucharist using arguments from phenomenology and Mulla Sadra, branching into a more general argument against the incarnation branching into an argument against the trinity. Use principles such as the immutability of God, the illogic of accidents or change to occur in Him or His essence (branching into a general argument against Him having quiddity), His limitlessness (be it temporal, physical, or spiritual; since God cannot be said to be in one place and be lacking in another), late Ashari Atomism, and existentialism.

Question

Ask a Philosopher · Accepted Answer

The Ratzinger-Nichols conception of transubstantiation in the Eucharist is one that raises many philosophical questions. At its core, this belief asserts that during the ritual of Communion, the bread and wine actually transform into the body and blood of Jesus Christ. However, from a phenomenological perspective, this claim seems to contradict our understanding of the world around us. Phenomenology teaches us to approach reality through our lived experiences, and in this case, it is difficult to reconcile the idea of physical transformation with our everyday perceptions of the material world. Additionally, the teachings of Mulla Sadra, a Persian philosopher who emphasized the concept of substantial change, further challenge the notion of transubstantiation. Sadra believed that substances exist in a specific way, and for something to fundamentally change its essence would go against the very nature of existence.

Moreover, delving into a more general argument against the incarnation, we encounter the issue of the immutability of God. If we accept the premise that God is unchanging and eternal, then the idea of God taking on human form seems contradictory. How can a being that is perfect and infinite in all aspects suddenly become limited in time, space, and form? This leads us to question the very nature of God's essence and whether He can truly possess quiddity or specific characteristics like a human being.

Building upon these arguments, we can also consider the theological concept of the trinity. The belief in a triune God poses challenges to our understanding of limitlessness, both in temporal and spiritual terms. Late Ashari Atomism, a school of thought that emphasized the indivisibility and simplicity of God, further complicates the idea of God existing in three distinct persons. If God is truly beyond comprehension and transcendent in nature, how can He be split into separate entities?

In conclusion, these philosophical arguments against the Ratzinger-Nichols conception of transubstantiation, the incarnation, and the trinity demonstrate the complexity of theological beliefs and their implications on our understanding of existence. By questioning the logic of accidents or change occurring in God or His essence, as well as His limitlessness in all aspects, we are forced to confront the mysteries of divinity and the limitations of human comprehension. Existentialism teaches us to embrace our freedom and responsibility in shaping our own beliefs, and in this case, a critical examination of these theological concepts is essential for deepening our understanding of the ineffable nature of God."