Did Jesus Know All Things At All Times?

[RastaPasta]

I am not sure if this is the correct forum to ask this question. If I have erred in some way, I would like to apologize to the individuals posting here. If you would be so kind as to the direct me to the proper forum, I will post my inquiry there.

I don’t believe that discovering the answer to my question (if there even is one) is necessary with regard to Faith and Morals.

Nonetheless, my sense of curiosity has been nagging me, as I can’t seem to entirely let go of the issue at hand.

It begins with Jesus - unique with respect to the fact that He had both a Divine and human nature.

Jesus Divine is the word.

As the Gospel of St. John tells us: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be”.

Because Jesus Divine IS God, He is equal to God in all things. Logically, that would mean that Jesus Divine had all of the attributes of the Father; Omnipresent, Omniscient, Omnipotent.

But then there is Jesus Human - A man like us in all things with the exception of sin. As that is the case, logic tells me that Jesus Human was neither Omnipresent, Omniscient, or Omnipotent as those attributes would make him a man like us with the exception of some things. But then again, the human Jesus is also God.

I believe (although I could be mistaken) that the Catholic Catechism teaches us that Jesus did have to learn (though I suspect that He had a “learning curve” far superior to that of our own), which would mean that He didn’t know all things at all times.

So I guess that the real question is: What did Jesus know, and when did He know it"?

Did he know at the age of 6 (for instance), that at the age of 33 He would be tortured, beaten, spit at, scourged, and ultimately crucified?

Would any loving human tell that to a 6 year old child (even if they knew it to be true)? I can’t picture a loving God that would present that information to someone at such an early age.

On the other hand, Scripture tells us that Jesus was found teaching in the Temple during his youth (the age of 12 perhaps) and that the other “learned” men present were amazed by his knowledge.

This would indicate the fact that even though Jesus was human, His understanding of Scripture was exceptional. In addition, He states (to Mary) that He was going about His “Father’s business”… which would indicate that He was fully aware of His Divine nature, as well as His human nature.

Additionally, because Jesus DID have such a profound understanding of Scripture, it stands to reason that He fully understood (at a young age) that He WAS the Savior, and that one day He WOULD be crucified.

And what about when Jesus invited Judas to be an Apostle? Did He know right then and there (on the spot if you will), that Judas was the Apostle that would eventually betray Him?

We know that Jesus certainly did know things ahead of time. (An example would be when Jesus told the woman at the well to call for her husband, and in turn she stated that she has no husband… whereas Jesus points out the fact that she is with a man that is not her husband.) In fact, there are numerous places in Scripture that indicate the fact that Jesus “knew things ahead of time”.

But did He ALWAYS know ALL things ahead of time, or did he let God’s plan (and His plan as well) unfold before his eyes (so to speak) without always making use of His Divine nature?

Again, none of this is necessary to understand with respect to Faith and Morals… but I’m just really curious about Jesus.

Thank you in advance, if you respond to this post.

God Bless.

 

[Nelka]

He always knew.

 

[Edmundus1581]

…
But did He ALWAYS know ALL things ahead of time, or did he let God’s plan (and His plan as well) unfold before his eyes (so to speak) without always making use of His Divine nature?
…

Your whole post is very good, and explains and motivates your question well. I have selected this paragraph as summing it up.

The Bible answers the main question clearly. Jesus did not know all things ahead of time. While he had unusual gifts of prophecy and insight, he was also subject to human limitations.

The Bible tells us that Jesus was amazed by other people, twice. A person cannot be “amazed” by something they knew would happen in advance. They might feign amazement, but they cannot be genuinely amazed, and the gospels are clear that Jesus was genuinely amazed.

He was amazed at their lack of faith. Mk 6:6

When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Amen, I say to you, in no one in Israel have I found such faith. * Mt 8:10

The parallels between these two incidents of Jesus being “amazed” is “amazing” in itself, and I am sure has been much studied and commented on. (comments or links, anyone?).

With reference to the boy Jesus in the temple, it is important to note that he was not just answering questions, but he was, primarily, asking questions.

*After three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions, and all who heard him were astounded at his understanding and his answers. * [Lk 2:46-47]

If Jesus knew everything in advance he would have no need to ask questions of the teachers. This incident shows Jesus’ own deference to the traditions and teachings of the Jews, as transmitted through the living authorities. While the passage mentions Jesus’ “answers”, these seem to be the responses (or even “follow up” questions) that he gave to the teachers’ answers to his questions, as often happens in a respectful exchange between a teacher and student.

Those three passages are clear, and, I think, answer the question. We can also infer from the nature of the Holy Family that Jesus did not know everything in advance, as it would have fallen to Joseph and Mary to raise Jesus in the normal way, both in religion and general life guidance. Our understanding of the Holy Family, supported by Luke 2, is that they were a “normal” family in most ways, and that the relationship between Jesus and his parents was the normal relationship of a child, under their instruction and guidance.

Hope that helps,

Edmundus

 

[buffalo]

He always knew.

However, he experienced being human. A Divine being had to subject Himself to the limitations of being human.

 

[tonyrey]

Welcome to the forum!

One statement by Jesus is evidence that He did not know all things at all times:

“However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.” - Matthew 24:36

 

[buffalo]

Welcome to the forum!

One statement by Jesus is evidence that He did not know all things at all times:

“However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.” - Matthew 24:36

No - it means He couldn’t reveal it.

Haydock Commentary

Ver. 36. No man knoweth … but the Father alone. The words in St. Mark (xiii. 32.) are still harder: neither the angels, nor the Son, but the Father. The Arians objected this place, to shew that Christ being ignorant of the day of judgment, could not be truly God. By the same words, no one knoweth, but the Father alone, (as they expound them) the Holy Ghost must be excluded from being the true God. In answer to this difficulty, when it is said, but the Father alone, it is certain that the eternal Son and the Holy Ghost could never be ignorant of the day of judgment: because, as they are one and the same God, so they must have one and the same nature, the same substance, wisdom, knowledge, and all absolute perfections. 2. It is also certain that Jesus Christ knew the day of judgment, and all things to come, by a knowledge which he could not but have, because of the union by which his human nature was united to the divine person and nature. See Colossians ii. 3. And so to attribute any ignorance to Christ, was the error of those heretics called Agnoitai. 3. But though Christ, as a man, knew the day of judgment, yet this knowledge was not due to him as he was man, or because he was man, but he only knew the day of judgment, because he was God as well as man. 4. It is the common answer of the fathers, that Christ here speaks to his disciples, only as he was the ambassador of his Father; and so he is only to know what he is to make known to men. He is said not to know, says St. Augustine[5], what he will not make others know, or what he will not reveal to them. (Witham) — By this Jesus Christ wished to suppress the curiosity of his disciples. In the same manner after his resurrection, he answered the same question: 'Tis not for you to know the times and the moments, which the Father has placed in his own power. This last clause is added, that the apostles might not be discouraged and think their divine Master esteemed them unworthy of knowing these things. Some Greek manuscripts add nor even the Son, as in Mark xiii. 32. The Son is ignorant of it, not according to his divinity, nor even according to his humanity hypostatically united to his divinity, but according to his humanity, considered as separate from his divinity. (Bible de Vence)

 

[tonyrey]

No - it means He couldn’t reveal it.

Haydock Commentary

Ver. 36. No man knoweth … but the Father alone. The words in St. Mark (xiii. 32.) are still harder: neither the angels, nor the Son, but the Father. The Arians objected this place, to shew that Christ being ignorant of the day of judgment, could not be truly God. By the same words, no one knoweth, but the Father alone, (as they expound them) the Holy Ghost must be excluded from being the true God. In answer to this difficulty, when it is said, but the Father alone, it is certain that the eternal Son and the Holy Ghost could never be ignorant of the day of judgment: because, as they are one and the same God, so they must have one and the same nature, the same substance, wisdom, knowledge, and all absolute perfections. 2. It is also certain that Jesus Christ knew the day of judgment, and all things to come, by a knowledge which he could not but have, because of the union by which his human nature was united to the divine person and nature. See Colossians ii. 3. And so to attribute any ignorance to Christ, was the error of those heretics called Agnoitai. 3. But though Christ, as a man, knew the day of judgment, yet this knowledge was not due to him as he was man, or because he was man, but he only knew the day of judgment, because he was God as well as man. 4. It is the common answer of the fathers, that Christ here speaks to his disciples, only as he was the ambassador of his Father; and so he is only to know what he is to make known to men. He is said not to know, says St. Augustine[5], what he will not make others know, or what he will not reveal to them. (Witham) — By this Jesus Christ wished to suppress the curiosity of his disciples. In the same manner after his resurrection, he answered the same question: 'Tis not for you to know the times and the moments, which the Father has placed in his own power. This last clause is added, that the apostles might not be discouraged and think their divine Master esteemed them unworthy of knowing these things. Some Greek manuscripts add nor even the Son, as in Mark xiii. 32. The Son is ignorant of it, not according to his divinity, nor even according to his humanity hypostatically united to his divinity, but according to his humanity, considered as separate from his divinity. (Bible de Vence)

Jesus in His humanity didn’t know everything…

 

[buffalo]

Jesus in His humanity didn’t know everything…

He had to experience humanity from humanities’ point of view not a Divine point of view. I do not concede He was not omniscient while here on earth.

 

[RastaPasta]

Hello:

I’m still trying to develop a better understanding of the nature of Christ.

Based on all that I have read thus far:

The divine nature of Jesus is omniscient, but the human nature of Christ is not - the Catholic Catechism tells us that Jesus learned from human experience.

Additionally, the divine conscious and human conscious of Jesus are two distinctly separate natures in the one person of Christ.

So the mystery is:

How can Jesus be all knowing, and unknowing at the same time?

 

[RastaPasta]

Hello:

I’m still trying to develop a better understanding of the nature of Christ.

Based on all that I have read thus far:

The divine nature of Jesus is omniscient, but the human nature of Christ is not - the Catholic Catechism tells us that Jesus learned from human experience.

Additionally, the divine conscious and human conscious of Jesus are two distinctly separate natures in the one person of Christ.

So the mystery is:

How can Jesus be all knowing, and unknowing at the same time?

Addendum:

The Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.) states:

We unanimously teach that the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, is one and the same, the same perfect in divinity, the same perfect in humanity, true God and true man, consisting of rational soul and body, consubstantial with the Father in divinity and consubstantial with us in humanity… in two natures, unconfused, unchangeable, undivided and inseparable.

The difference of natures will never be abolished by their being united, but rather the properties of each remain unimpaired, both coming together in one person and substance, not parted or divided among two persons, but in one and the same only begotten Son, the Divine Word, the Lord Jesus Christ.

To correct my previous statement.

 

[empther]

Father Mullady on EWTN gave a series of talks about the Jesus.

Jesus was a Divine Person, not a human person. Nevertheless, he had a human body and soul.

Since he was a divine person, it was impossible that the man not have the Beatific vision at all times. Father Mullady said Jesus had the Beatific vision at conception !
It could not be otherwise. He was God.

So where did that leave the human intellect of Jesus?

Since human nature is limited, not finite, his intellect was limited. But the Holy Trinity saw to it he knew all he “needed to know” at all times, which was a lot.

I don’t see that he needed to know about the cruxifiction when he was six years old. He might have been informed by God that he would have to sacrifice himself. He need not know the details.

One of the twelve Apostles he chose was Judas. Did Jesus know at the time he chose Judas that Judas would betray him. I suspect not.

But wait a minute! Wouldn’t Jesus “need to know” this, to use my own phrase?
Why? So he wouldn’t choose Judas and be crucified?

Jesus came into the world to die for us. If it wasn’t by Judas’s betrayal it would be by somebody else’s hand. Jesus could not avoid his mission; it was the Father’s will. Therefore, he could be left in the dark about the details…

 

[tonyrey]

Jesus in His humanity

Do you believe Jesus knew everything as a man when He lived in this world? It would seem to contradict the belief that He was like us in all things but sin.

 

[tonyrey]

…So where did that leave the human intellect of Jesus?

Since human nature is limited, not finite, his intellect was limited. But the Holy Trinity saw to it he knew all he “needed to know” at all times, which was a lot.

I don’t see that he needed to know about the crucifixion when he was six years old. He might have been informed by God that he would have to sacrifice himself. He need not know the details.

One of the twelve Apostles he chose was Judas. Did Jesus know at the time he chose Judas that Judas would betray him. I suspect not.

But wait a minute! Wouldn’t Jesus “need to know” this, to use my own phrase?
Why? So he wouldn’t choose Judas and be crucified?

Jesus came into the world to die for us. If it wasn’t by Judas’s betrayal it would be by somebody else’s hand. Jesus could not avoid his mission; it was the Father’s will. Therefore, he could be left in the dark about the details…

Precisely! Although in heaven the Father’s Will is identical with the Will of the Son and the Will of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Curious_Seed]

Did Jesus know all things, at all times?

Beautiful question, for discussion.

For my understanding, Jesus was not divine, while on earth.

He was sinless.

He lived in communion with the Father and did, as anyone, without sin, can do.

He knew of the future, what the Father revealed to Him - as is available to anyone who is in sinless communication with God.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

No - it means He couldn’t reveal it.

This is open to interpret that He lied that he did not know. That’s impossible, therefore He simply was not revealed the hour during this time.

After His ascension, it would follow that He was revealed all things,

[BIBLEDRB]John 21:17[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[buffalo]

Did Jesus know all things, at all times?

Beautiful question, for discussion.

For my understanding, Jesus was not divine, while on earth.

He was sinless.

He lived in communion with the Father and did, as anyone, without sin, can do.

He knew of the future, what the Father revealed to Him - as is available to anyone who is in sinless communication with God.

Jesus Christ, the Person

 

[VeritasSeeker]

Here is some very good information from an expert, it may surprise you:
newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/05/did-jesus-know-day-and-hour-of.html

Quote taken from site: “If anyone says that the one Jesus Christ who is both true Son of God and true Son of man did not know the future or the day of the Last Judgment and that he could know only as much as the divinity, dwelling in him as in another, revealed to him, anathema sit.” (Pope Vigilius, Constitutum I of 14 May 553)

This site contains a wealth of information. Fr. Ryan Erlenbush (who is the chief poster on the site) is very orthodox and philosophically learned.

 

[Michael19682]

Jesus’ body lost a lot of blood in the crucifixion. Thomas put his hand in Jesus’ side as proof of this. Also, Jesus prayed for ‘this cup to pass’, perhaps indicating that His human tendency to avoid death was so great that he wanted God to repeal his will. Instead of a bead of water as his sweat, it was loss of blood. For some reason he differentiated between his body and his blood. Since blood is normally invisible when looking at a person, and is replenished by water and wine both, it is likely to mean Spirit. Saint Augustine and probably others say that the Spirit unites the Trinity. Spirit unites the Church into one body. A great mystery, and I think that the fact the Church says “He emptied himself of his divinity” indicates that his loss of blood was a complete gift of his spirit to us. If we have his full spirit from the complete outpouring of his blood we too should know the time of the second coming. Since we don’t know that, it stands to reason that he did not know it either and that it is not a matter of ‘could not reveal it.’

 

[claymcdermott]

We all sound like we are stretching a bit. Let me join in!

I should think the best answer has to account for what Jesus was aware of as an infant, or as an embryo.

What does it mean to say Jesus knew anything before he had a developed brain? He might have known things in his soul. This is true of human experience; often one knows things implicitly which he seldom ever expresses explicitly or is perhaps conscious of.

Perhaps consciousness is key. Jesus did know all things in his human person. You know many things which are not actually in mind right now. Who was the fifteenth president? You might have to think about that one, but you know it (If you don’t know it was James Buchanan, you know, there are other things). It would be inaccurate to say you did not know it before I asked you about it, just because it was not in mind.

So, I wonder. Jesus knew that in 1492, a man whose name in English would be Christopher Columbus would discover the New World, where Cindy Lauper would be born a little under five centuries later. Would any of this have ever occurred to him as a subject of thought? No. So one could say, yes, in his human person he knew this, but he was never anywhere near conscious of it.

One possible solution.

By the way, VeritasSeeker, why do all popes from like 800 - 1955 insist on speaking in triple or quadruple negatives? I mean, I’d be lying if I said that I am a guy that can’t never not stop misunderstanding that. Just kidding.

 

[Michael19682]

We all sound like we are stretching a bit. Let me join in!

I should think the best answer has to account for what Jesus was aware of as an infant, or as an embryo.

What does it mean to say Jesus knew anything before he had a developed brain? He might have known things in his soul. This is true of human experience; often one knows things implicitly which he seldom ever expresses explicitly or is perhaps conscious of.

Perhaps consciousness is key. Jesus did know all things in his human person. You know many things which are not actually in mind right now. Who was the fifteenth president? You might have to think about that one, but you know it (If you don’t know it was James Buchanan, you know, there are other things). It would be inaccurate to say you did not know it before I asked you about it, just because it was not in mind.

So, I wonder. Jesus knew that in 1492, a man whose name in English would be Christopher Columbus would discover the New World, where Cindy Lauper would be born a little under five centuries later. Would any of this have ever occurred to him as a subject of thought? No. So one could say, yes, in his human person he knew this, but he was never anywhere near conscious of it.

One possible solution.

By the way, VeritasSeeker, why do all popes from like 800 - 1955 insist on speaking in triple or quadruple negatives? I mean, I’d be lying if I said that I am a guy that can’t never not stop misunderstanding that. Just kidding.

It sounds like you are trying to tweedle in a theology of the body. Be serious, he is God and limited in no way unless he chooses to limit himself in some aspect. To say would any of this ever have occurred to him, NO, is something that is as you a complete stretch, and a disingenuous one at that.