Did Jesus divest himself of omniscience to be fully human?

[LateranBasilica]

My intention is not to convince you what Catholics know.
Many things atheists reject, a Catholic would also reject too. Bishop Barron discusses this. There will be talks by Bishop Barron on this, on the internet if you have the time and desire to listen to them.
The councils did not teach. That was not their purpose or intention. Therefore a Catholic would reject the notion that the early councils taught. Just as you are doing now.

It can be stated with accuracy that there was a man named Jesus, a pious Jewish peasant carpenter from Nazareth, known as the son of Joseph. Some called Him a Rabbi. It is known that the historical man named Jesus was crucified by the Romans for treason and blasphemy.
There is a great lecture series by a professor of archaeology and the Old Testament, called Jesus and His Jewish influences. This series is by Dr Jodie Magness. You might enjoy it.

As I said, let’s deal with one concept and it’s associated passages at a time. This is because to study and consider each point of yours, there will be a lot to consider and know. Ie what is the historical background of the return from Babylon, the priestly families, or what is ritual purity and how did Jesus attend to it in His parables. What sin can not be dealt with by ritual purity. Why did worship happen at the Temple, why was Jesus objecting to the money changers. Remember Jesus was a first century pious Jew, as were His family.

With the passage only the Father knows the day and time, those who don’t know are listed as Angels, people and even the Son of Man do not know.
Absolutely no mention is made of the Spirit of God one way or the other. As we know, the Spirit of God is neither man, angel or the Son of Man.

 

[LateranBasilica]

I agree with the citations .

I would have you link your proofs to your points individually. Break it down as they say.

 

[Elf01]

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.

I make sense of the hypostatic union by remembering that a beam of light can go through two slits.

 

[goout]

goout:

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.

We don’t explain away anything. Any credible historian will acknowledge that Jesus existed and is a real person in human history. We are simply recognizing that Good News. Did you know the Gospels are writings that came out of eyewitness accounts, carried on through oral tradition by real people, then committed to writing? If Jesus walks among human beings, as fully human, why would you be surprised if he displays humanity?

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.

Contradictions are part of life. We resolve them. That’s simply a mature response to things we don’t understand.

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.

Prophesy is not for telling the future, prophesy is to proclaim truth for the benefit of others, to exhort them, remind them, awaken them.
Your whole point about prophecy rests on reductionist materialism. As if Jesus is The Lord of All Facts. That’s not a very satisfying point of view.

You can’t dismiss Jesus’ less than complete knowledge when multiple theologians have cited omniscience (total knowledge) as being necessary for a deity.

Hypostatic union. Both/and. Love unifies. Flaws are made whole. Contradictions come together.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

The councils did not teach. That was not their purpose or intention. Therefore a Catholic would reject the notion that the early councils taught.

But it would be fair say the councils were there to determine what is and is not true about the faith. Part of that has to involve showing why one is to believe as such. But really this doesn’t have anything to do with the topic at hand.

It can be stated with accuracy that there was a man named Jesus, a pious Jewish peasant carpenter from Nazareth, known as the son of Joseph. Some called Him a Rabbi. It is known that the historical man named Jesus was crucified by the Romans for treason and blasphemy.
There is a great lecture series by a professor of archaeology and the Old Testament, called Jesus and His Jewish influences. This series is by Dr Jodie Magness. You might enjoy it.

As I said in an earlier post I wouldn’t say that definitely there was a historical Jesus, but there probably was. It doesn’t make the tales in the Bible about him true, nor does it solve the logical disconnect between Jesus being a deity and not being omniscient.

Anyway, thank you for the recommendation on the lecture series. I’ll check it out if I get the chance.

With the passage only the Father knows the day and time, those who don’t know are listed as Angels, people and even the Son of Man do not know.
Absolutely no mention is made of the Spirit of God one way or the other. As we know, the Spirit of God is neither man, angel or the Son of Man.

If I say no one is allowed in my house but me alone, then I list several examples of people not allowed in my house does that mean that people other than my given examples are allowed in my house? No, of course not. By using the term alone/only it says explicitly that there is exactly one exception. In the interlinear reading of Matthew 24:36 it uses the word μόνος, which can be used either alone or only. Only the father knows the day and hour. Not the Holy Spirit. Just because Jesus doesn’t give Satan or Tom Cruise as examples of people who don’t know doesn’t mean that they know. Only means only.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I agree with the citations .

I’d hope so. They come from the Bible.

I would have you link your proofs to your points individually. Break it down as they say.

I mean they seem fairly self-explanatory to me, but I’m not afraid of a little legwork.

Let’s start with the parallel passages from the Olivet Discourse. They mention that this generation will not pass away until all of these things be done. What are these things?

‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory

Jesus is describing unmistakale signs that people all over the world will see and cause them to mourn. I think it’s safe to say that these things have not yet come to pass, yet Jesus assured us that this generation will not pass away. Since that gerneration did pass away almost two millennia ago, the prophecy failed.

We then have the parallel passages where Jesus told him Caiphas would see Jesus coming in the clouds of Heaven, the same language used in the Olivet Discourse (which we know was shown as failed).

There are the parallel passages where Jesus tells his disciples about his death and that they would see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom before some of them tasted death. Again, they didn’t see him in his glory in his kingdom in the clouds, thus Jesus’ prophecy failed.

Matthew 10:23 tells his disciples that if they get persecuted in one town to flee to the next, and before they run out of towns they will see the Son of Man come. The author of the vidoe series I linked to noted that with the small amount of real estate that was Israel this was not a long way off.

1 Corinthians 7:29 Paul is telling the Church of Corinth to basically stay in whatever situation they are in (married/unmarried) and not worry about changing because the time is short. What does it mean by saying that the time is short for everyone? It sounds like Jesus’ return to me.

1 Peter 4:7 outright says the end of all things is near. Not 50 years. Not 200 years. Not 2000 years and counting Not until the Knicks win another championship. Near enough that people being talked to are to be on their toes.

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 is the “rapture” verse. Now, I’m not concerned with whether people will be literally be caught up in the air, but the use of “we who are alive”. Some of those being written to were expected to be alive at that time that this event occured. Since it didn’t happen within their lifetimes it is false.

James 5:8-9 says in very plain terms that “the coming of the Lord is at hand”. It even reference the door analogy used in the Olivet Discourse.

Time and time and time again the Bible reference Jesus’ imminent arrival in the clouds for all to see (with it’s doomsday signs) and here we are many, many years later with the disciples long dead.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I make sense of the hypostatic union by remembering that a beam of light can go through two slits.

That’s an interesting analogy. The question of whether light is a wave or a particle is a tough one. People more knowledgable in physics than me are welcome to correct me, but my understanding is that while light in some ways acts like a wave and some ways acts like a particle, it is not fully a particle and fully a wave. This Wired article I’d saved from a few years back suggests that light is a wave, but that going at the speed of light makes it align with some of the models for particles.

Again, we can’t say for sure at this time. There is more that is being learned, and it’s ok that we don’t know. It’s this acceptance of doubt that makes the call that Jesus was absolutely certainly fully man and fully divine strange to me.

---

@goout CAF seems to have implemented a “no more than three replies in a row” rule. Once someone adds to this thread I will post my reply to your most recent post.

 

[LateranBasilica]

Let’s start with defining the term ‘Oliver discourse’ and determining if this is a term within the Catholic Church.

I found this

Matthew, CHAPTER 24 | USCCB

The Eschatological Discourse.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

We don’t explain away anything. Any credible historian will acknowledge that Jesus existed and is a real person in human history. We are simply recognizing that Good News. Did you know the Gospels are writings that came out of eyewitness accounts, carried on through oral tradition by real people, then committed to writing? If Jesus walks among human beings, as fully human, why would you be surprised if he displays humanity?

As I mentioned upthread there probably was a historical Jesus and he probably was crucified. That doesn’t mean that this historical Jesus (if he existed) was divine or performed the acts in the Bible. This is no different than saying if there was a historical Heracles there’s no proof he was tricked into holding up the Earth by Atlas.

Contradictions are part of life. We resolve them. That’s simply a mature response to things we don’t understand.

No, a mature answer would be to acknowledge that there are problems with an allegedly omniscient being not being omniscient. I’m not saying one should abandon the idea that Jesus is God because of this problem. but a mature – and honest – answer would be to state we don’t know why Jesus said he didn’t know the date or hour.

Prophesy is not for telling the future, prophesy is to proclaim truth for the benefit of others, to exhort them, remind them, awaken them.

Wait, prophecy isn’t about telling the future? Prophecy, the act of telling the future, is not for telling the future? This opens up a whole new world. Cars aren’t about going places! Medicine isn’t about healing!

Seriously, if you want to say that a product of prophecy is to exhourt, remind, or awaken others then I have no problem with that. But it certainly can’t be about proclaiming truth when the prophecy itself is embarrassingly false. The Bible itself says we are to ignore prophets with even one failed prophecy.

Your whole point about prophecy rests on reductionist materialism. As if Jesus is The Lord of All Facts. That’s not a very satisfying point of view.

So you’re saying God in any of his persons can give an utterly false prophecy and it would be okay? What happened to God not being able to lie? What happened to God being all knowing? Christians are the first to downplay God’s alleged power/ability if it means covering up the problems in the story.

Hypostatic union. Both/and. Love unifies. Flaws are made whole. Contradictions come together.

These are just a series of terms. This whole thread is about the problems in mixing hypostatic union and omniscience. Don’t just throw out terms and assume you’ve demonstrating anything concrete.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Is it really that vital that we go over the term? We both know what we’re referring to.

And we can find plenty of Catholics who refer to it as the Olivet Discourse. For example, here’s Jimmy Akin.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

One thing I want to add: In the link you gave the footnote for Matthew 24:34 notes that there is a difficulty in squaring “this generation will not pass away” with the fact that the generation did not pass away.

The difficulty raised by this verse cannot be satisfactorily removed by the supposition that this generation means the Jewish people throughout the course of their history, much less the entire human race. Perhaps for Matthew it means the generation to which he and his community belonged.

 

[AlNg]

I thought we decided this over a thousand years ago.

What was the decision? Is it true that according to what we are reading here- it is the case that Jesus was omniscient as a human, but He did not know the day or the hour?

 

[AlNg]

In the link you gave the footnote for Matthew 24:34

That presents another problem because my translation says in Matthew 24:35 that heaven will pass away. I thought that heaven was eternal and would not pass away.
“Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.”

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Heaven also means the sky.