Did Jesus divest himself of omniscience to be fully human?

[KevinK]

He was God so I don’t understand what you are saying.

 

[runningdude]

Jesus had two wills, human and divine. His divine will knew everything the Father knew; he never “forfeited” this knowledge. His human will knew whatever the Father needed him to know. It is unknowable the exact extent of his human faculties.

What we do know is that Christ was fully man, and full of grace from his conception onward. Still, he needed to learn to walk, to talk, to read and write. Mary had to nurse our tiny Lord, and comfort him when he stubbed his toe. Christ felt the soft warmth of human affection, and the sharp cold of human betrayal. Christ experienced agony in the garden, because his sinless human will could not want to die. His perfect human nature was immortal, and only through perfect trust in the Father could he persevere through death.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

(a) that would be a Someone, not a something, and (b) it is entirely possible to possess something and yet to choose not to make use of it. Something can be yours, you can choose to relinquish control over it, and yet it can still be just as much yours and just as available to you as if you chose to use it.

But this isn’t a matter of choosing to use omniscience, since it’s not something to be used. One either knows all or less than all. Now if you’re saying that he purposely kept himself from knowing all, then that raises a few other questions:

1. Jesus is shown to know other things that humans can not possibly know. Are there perhaps other pieces of knowledge from which he has shielded himself?
2. To what benefit does Jesus (and the Holy Spirit) not knowing the day and the hour benefit himself or anyone else? Normally a human chooses to not learn something for fear. A dad purposely stays off of his adult kids’ social media for fear of what he might see. A worker chooses not to dig into his boss’s actions for fear of the consequences. Jesus, being God, has no such fears.

In fact, Jesus seems to know a great deal about his return. Based on the Olivet Discourse he knows the signs of his return. He knows that Caiaphas and the whole world would see him return in the clouds and that it would be within the lifetime of the apostles (whoops). It doesn’t make any sense that he would deny himself this one facet of information.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

And @KevinK also:
Do you accept that Christ is one person with two natures, fully divine and fully human?
If not, the conversation is pointless. You simply disagree with Christian thought on this. Which is fine, but let’s just say so.

No, I do not accept that Christ had two natures. At the very least it makes no sense that he would be fully human and fully divine when the Scripture shows he is, at best, partially divine. Church fathers have taught that omniscience is a necessary component of divinity, yet based on the passage talked about in this thread he does not possess omniscience.

The best way to describe how apologists describe Jesus is like someone with multiple personality disorder. Why does he not know the day and hour? He’s speaking from his human nature. Why does he know things no human could know? He’s speaking from his divine nature.

And even though I myself don’t believe Jesus had/has such natures it’s still an interesting topic of discussion. Also anything that we consider true should be able to withstand scrutiny. The more it can withstand the more likely it is to be true.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Omniscience seen through a materialist lens is knowing a bunch of facts.
Omniscience seen through a Christian sense is deeper than that.

One thing I’ve been working on are “The Three Rs of Apologetics”. They are Retreat, Redefine, and Rationalize. This is a clear case of redefining a word.

The “omni” in omniscience means “all”. If one does not possess all knowledge than one is not omniscient, period. If one is not omniscient, then by some standards that one is not divine.

By analogy (before you pick out the inadequacy of this, keep in mind that it’s an analogy, not the thing itself)
By analogy, I know my wife. She’s 60 years old, born in the USA, 5’6". etc…I can tell you all the facts about her, and claim “I know everything about her”.
Then there is knowing of a higher level. This kind of knowing is an exchange of persons. Love. Communion. Complete intimacy. God is complete in his intimacy, and that is complete knowledge.

You’re conflating the common usage of knowing everything in a “Do really well on The Newlywed Game” sense with the actual definition of the word when it comes to a supreme being for which there is no knowledge he doesn’t know.

At the end of the day, that is the only kind of knowledge that matters. Facts fade to dust. “what did Jesus know and when did he know it?” Who really cares? What is the point of playing “gotcha” with God.

If you’re willing to shrink God, to make it so that he is not complete knowledge, to where his creation is bigger than he can comprehend, then you may do so. it’s just that it’s not how God is defined and it’s not even close to what omniscience means. Will you redefine all of the "omni"s associated with Adona? Is his omnibenevolence really just that he’s a nice guy? Is his omnipotence really just that he’s the most powerful, but not infinitely powerful? Is his omnipresence really just that he’s in a bunch of places, not necessarily everywhere?

 

[goout]

And the response to your observations is, if you don’t accept the hypostatic union, none of this even matters. If you insist, along with fundamentalists, that various scripture passages are dissectable by you, with your understanding, in an individualist fundamentalist vaccuum, then yea, there’s a hammered metal dome in the sky and Christians are nut-cases.

I respect your faith.
I don’t share it (I think atheism is the most superstitious belief system available), but I respect your right to believe it.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

And the response to your observations is, if you don’t accept the hypostatic union, none of this even matters. If you insist, along with fundamentalists, that various scripture passages are dissectable by you, with your understanding, in an individualist fundamentalist vaccuum, then yea, there’s a hammered metal dome in the sky and Christians are nut-cases.

I don’t dismiss hypostatic union out of hand. I don’t buy into it because it is internally inconsistent. It has the distinct whiff of trying to explain Jesus actions after the fact. A “fundamentalist” reading also has nothing to do with it. I should reasonably be able to interpret that if the Bible says something about Jesus it doesn’t mean its exact 180 degree opposite.

Perhaps you can answer the question I posed to PetraG: To what benefit does Jesus (and the Holy Spirit) not knowing the day and the hour benefit himself or anyone else?

I respect your faith.
I don’t share it (I think atheism is the most superstitious belief system available), but I respect your right to believe it.

I respect yours as well. I’ve said many times before and I’ll say it a million times more: Different reasonable people can see the same evidence and come to differing conclusions. I find serious fault in the defense of Christianity, but the topic is so nebulous in nature it’s impossible to pin down what may or may not be true about it.

 

[LateranBasilica]

Perhaps you can answer the question I posed to PetraG: To what benefit does Jesus (and the Holy Spirit) not knowing the day and the hour benefit himself or anyone else?

Jesus said this as fully human. His entire mission was to pronounce the Kingdom of God and in those times everyone was waiting on the Apocalyptic Messiah to herald in the Eschaton. The community at Qumran was expecting two Messiahs, many were preaching and claiming to be the messiah, both before and after Jesus’s time.
To what benefit is it that Jesus the human could not answer a day and time for the Eschaton , very great benefit that society did not fall apart because we all know or knew when that hour is. IMHO

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Jesus said this as fully human. His entire mission was to pronounce the Kingdom of God and in those times everyone was waiting on the Apocalyptic Messiah to herald in the Eschaton. The community at Qumran was expecting two Messiahs, many were preaching and claiming to be the messiah, both before and after Jesus’s time.
To what benefit is it that Jesus the human could not answer a day and time for the Eschaton , very great benefit that society did not fall apart because we all know or knew when that hour is. IMHO

There are certain problems with that:

1. Again we have this duel-personality idea of Jesus: That he’s fully divine – some of the time. He’s fully human – some of the time. To not know means in no way, shape, or form having the knowledge of something. At the times when he was speaking from his divine nature, did he know the day and the hour? If in those times he didn’t know as well, then he’s not fully divine. If in those instances he does know, then it’s completely inaccurate to say that he does know.
2. Clearly he does know all of the other aspects of his return, as he described them in the Olivet Discourse. What makes not knowing that one piece of information so necessary?
3. If Jesus does know, that doesn’t mean that he must reveal it There are a great many things that Jesus allegedly knew/knows that he never directly told us. There’s no reason this should be any different.
4. Jesus did say that his return would be imminent. He told his apostles he would return before they tasted death. He told them that if they get persecuted in one town to move to the other, and that he would return before the apostles completed going through all the towns. He told the high priest Caiaphas hat he would see Jesus’ return in the clouds. In fact, he said that the whole world would see him return in the clouds. So not only did he have access to a great deal of information about his return he gave them a general idea when it would be.
5. To what benefit is it that the Holy Spirit does not know the day and the hour?

In the end, this issue seems unable to rescued without ignore multiple passages and playing fast and loose with what it means to be divine.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

When did Jesus say that it was at the time of the Apostles?

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

The point is that Christians are supposed to be vigilant in their spiritual development and no wait until the last minute, so that’s why He doesn’t tell anyone.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Here’s a list compiled from a web series I like. Now each video is 10 minutes in length, so it wouldn’t be fair to expect anyone to watch the whole thing, but it’s there for reference. The Biblical passages should speak for themselves:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4 - Arguments against preterism
Part 5 - Arguments against futurism, and a brief mention why he doesn’t think a translation of generation as “people” or “nation” works

… this generation shall not pass…

Matthew 24:34
Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Mark 13:30
Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, until all these things be done.

Luke 21:32
Amen, I say to you, this generation shall not pass away, till all things be fulfilled.

Matthew 23:36
Amen I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation.

… shall not taste death…

Matthew 16:28
Amen I say to you, there are some of them that stand here, that shall not taste death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Mark 9:1
And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”

Luke 9:27
But I tell you of a truth: There are some standing here that shall not taste death, till they see the kingdom of God.

Caiphas shall see the return of Jesus in the clouds.

Matthew 26:64
Jesus saith to him: Thou hast said it. Nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Mark 14:62
And Jesus said to him: I am. And you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God, and coming with the clouds of heaven.

Individual examples

Matthew 10:23
And when they shall persecute you in this city, flee into another. Amen I say to you, you shall not finish all the cities of Israel, till the Son of man come.

1 Corinthians 7:29
This therefore I say, brethren; the time is short; it remaineth, that they also who have wives, be as if they had none;

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
Then we who are alive, who are left, shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ, into the air, and so shall we be always with the Lord. Wherefore, comfort ye one another with these words.

1 Peter 4:7
But the end of all is at hand. Be prudent therefore, and watch in prayers.

James 5:8-9
Be you therefore also patient, and strengthen your hearts: for the coming of the Lord is at hand.
Grudge not, brethren, one against another, that you may not be judged. Behold the judge standeth before the door.

This may be a reference to this passage in Mark 13:29
So you also when you shall see these things come to pass, know ye that it is very nigh, even at the doors.
(end part 1)

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

(part 2)

Assuaging fears that Jesus has not returned
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord delayeth not his promise, as some imagine, but dealeth patiently for your sake, not willing that any should perish, but that all should return to penance.

One final item. The Bible says if a prophet’s prophecy fails – even one – then he is not from God and should be ignored.

Deuteronomy 18:22
Thou shalt have this sign: Whatsoever that same prophet foretelleth in the name of the Lord, and it cometh not to pass: that thing the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath forged it by the pride of his mind: and therefore thou shalt not fear him.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Some of those can easily be about the Ascension or the Church.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Some of those can easily be about the Ascension or the Church.

If it’s easy, why not go through a few of them and show how they can be interpreted as such, and also show why your reading should be preferred over the plain reading of Jesus’ return?

I’m headed to work so I’ll be back later. Thanks.

 

[LateranBasilica]

Mike I am just going to address your first point.

Catholics know Jesus to be fully Divine and to be fully human. Several early councils were called to address the heresies that Jesus was either not fully human , or not fully Divine, or any combination or lack.

Jesus was fully human in His incarnation ALL of the time. Jesus is an historical figure written about by several non Jewish Christian sect (as The followers of Jesus, later to be known as Christians) writers who lived in AD 1 , 2 and 3. Flavours Josephus, Tacticus Philo of Alexandria and Pliny, amongst them.

And

Jesus did not say His return would be ‘imminent’
Can you please quote the Bible passages you are referring to in # 4. We can address them individually.

As an aside
Jesus did not say He would return in the clowns

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God. Again for everyone staying the Holy Spirit does or does not have knowledge , where is the specific passage stating the Holy Spirit does not know the hour or day or minute. I read Angels and People and the Son do not know, I see no mention of the Holy Spirit. In the relevant passage.

Btw I won’t watch any links.
Please just put biblical quotes in for each point you raised, one point at a time. It is too confusing otherwise to try and match individual points of yours with all those quotes.
Bear in mind, each passage cannot be orphaned, it’s adjoining passages must be considered too.
For example, you have a quote or two in your post that refer to prophecy of the First Jewish Revolt and destruction of the Temple and a Jerusalem in 70AD.

 

[goout]

1. Again we have this duel-personality idea of Jesus: That he’s fully divine – some of the time. He’s fully human – some of the time.

If that were what we believed you have a valid point, but that’s not what we believe.

The incarnation is not a psychological disorder where we look for contradictions for their own sake.
It points to wholeness. It points to the unity of divine with human. You run into problems when you equate this intimacy with head knowledge. It’s not head knowledge like human beings have, it’s the perfect intimacy of love between divine/human.
Jesus does not have to know who you’re going out with next year at this time. That’s a pointless detail knowledge. That would make Christ into a circus fortune teller.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Mike I am just going to address your first point.

Catholics know Jesus to be fully Divine and to be fully human. Several early councils were called to address the heresies that Jesus was either not fully human , or not fully Divine, or any combination or lack.

I know what the councils taught, and I know that there were plenty of groups within Christianity that didn’t see Jesus as both fully human and fully divine. Just because a council makes a claim doesn’t mean it’s true. The claim still has to withstand scrutiny – not the least of which is the troubles with its internal logic.

Jesus was fully human in His incarnation ALL of the time. Jesus is an historical figure written about by several non Jewish Christian sect (as The followers of Jesus, later to be known as Christians) writers who lived in AD 1 , 2 and 3. Flavours Josephus, Tacticus Philo of Alexandria and Pliny, amongst them.

While there probably was a historical Jesus (although this can’t be said with any certainty) that doesn’t mean he was what is claimed of him in the Bible. It’s believed the character of Heracles (aka Hercules) was based on a real person. It doesn’t mean he redirected a river to clean the Aegean Stables.

And

Jesus did not say His return would be ‘imminent’
Can you please quote the Bible passages you are referring to in # 4. We can address them individually.

I literally posted over a dozen passages showing that Jesus’ return would be soon (certainly within the lifetimes of the apostles and Caiaphas and not 2000 years).

As an aside
Jesus did not say He would return in the clowns

Ha! Fixed.

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God. Again for everyone staying the Holy Spirit does or does not have knowledge , where is the specific passage stating the Holy Spirit does not know the hour or day or minute. I read Angels and People and the Son do not know, I see no mention of the Holy Spirit. In the relevant passage.

The passage says that only God the father knows. The second R in my Three Rs of Apologetics is “redefine”. Hopefully you’ll agree with me that if the Bible says only the Father knows then only the Father knows, leaving the Holy Spirit not to know.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Btw I won’t watch any links.
Please just put biblical quotes in for each point you raised, one point at a time. It is too confusing otherwise to try and match individual points of yours with all those quotes.

As I noted in my earlier post I didn’t expect most people to watch the links, but they’re there for anyone interested. Plus, it’s always proper to cite one’s source. There have been a few people on CAF who copy and pasted large amounts of texts from apologetic websites without such citations.

As far as the quotes you want me to post. Again, they’re right there taking up a vast majority of the post. I thought they were unmissable.

Bear in mind, each passage cannot be orphaned, it’s adjoining passages must be considered too.
For example, you have a quote or two in your post that refer to prophecy of the First Jewish Revolt and destruction of the Temple and a Jerusalem in 70AD.

The passages are quite clear, but if you feel any of them are out of context then please explain which ones and how one is to derive the context you believe is correct.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

If that were what we believed you have a valid point, but that’s not what we believe.

The incarnation is not a psychological disorder where we look for contradictions for their own sake.

I know that you don’t believe that Jesus had some kind of disorder, but believers essentially treat him as such when they try to explain away why Jesus sometimes acts as though he were not fully divine.

It points to wholeness. It points to the unity of divine with human. You run into problems when you equate this intimacy with head knowledge. It’s not head knowledge like human beings have, it’s the perfect intimacy of love between divine/human.

So the answer is special pleading, the idea that factual inconsistencies can be disregarded only in the case of God.

Jesus does not have to know who you’re going out with next year at this time. That’s a pointless detail knowledge. That would make Christ into a circus fortune teller.

But he makes a very big deal about knowing all of the signs of his impending return (the sun, the moon, the stars, etc.) and the general time frame, just not the day and hour. You can’t say that the day and hour are pointless details whereas everything leading up to it is not. You can’t say that Jesus knowing the future makes him a circus fortune teller, when he spends passage after passage prophesizing the future. You can’t dismiss Jesus’ less than complete knowledge when multiple theologians have cited omniscience (total knowledge) as being necessary for a deity.