The contradiction disappears once some elementary distinctions are introduced. If God did indeed become incarnate, it follows that we can contrast the properties of God-as-incarnate with the properties of God-as-not-incarnate. The former we may label incarnate divinity (which is human nature + divine nature) and the latter we may label mere divinity (which is the divine nature unaccompanied by any other nature). While the properties of mere divinity (or divinity as such) does not include the capacity to be tempted, the properties of incarnate divinity do include this capacity. Thus while God cannot be tempted qua God, he can be tempted qua man.