[Mrs. Don-o]

"The Omniscient had to learn to say "Ma-ma"
"Rarely are formal logical fallacies quite so overt as in your post."

Please look into the difference between paradox and logical fallacy.

(Sigh.) OK, I'll explain it. (Another sigh.) Paradox relies on something being true in one sense but not another. For instance: "Less is more," "He who loses his life shall find it." "It's a small world."

The Second Person of the Trinity, eternally existent Word of the Father, omniscient, assumed a human nature and had the brain, and hence the intellectual limitations and processes, of a human infant.

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

The Incarnation of Christ Our Lord is a source of endless paradoxes, because of the comprehensive differences beween infinite God and finite Man.

Life is a paradox ("The child is father of the man.") Love poetry, also, is full of paradoxes ("So happy I could cry" "Parting is such sweet sorrow") and liturgical poetry is too, because Liturgy is full of life and love.

You could say this is "foolish wisdom."

And if you said that, you'd be beginning to understand paradox.

[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.