Heb. 4:15 doesn't say that Jesus was like us in all ways

[japhy]

I often hear Heb. 4:15 cited as proof that Jesus (at least in his human nature) was “like us in all ways, except sin”. From here, people infer that Jesus, in his human nature, had imperfect wisdom (ignorance) or even error!

But that’s not what the verse says.
(RSV) For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

(NAB) For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way, yet without sin.

(KJV) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

(DR) For we have not a high priest, who can not have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.

(LV) non enim habemus pontificem qui non possit conpati infirmitatibus nostris temptatum autem per omnia pro similitudine absque peccato

(BNV) Non enim habemus pontificem, qui non possit compati infirmitatibus nostris, tentatum autem per omnia secundum similitudinem absque peccato;
Is there some other verse I’m missing? Otherwise, it is not contrary to Scripture (even Luke 2:52) that Jesus has perfect knowledge (insofar as a human mind and soul can have knowledge), or was a “perfect specimen” of mankind.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I often hear Heb. 4:15 cited as proof that Jesus (at least in his human nature) was “like us in all ways, except sin”. From here, people infer that Jesus, in his human nature, had imperfect wisdom (ignorance) or even error!

But that’s not what the verse says.(RSV) For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

(NAB) For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way, yet without sin.

(KJV) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

(DR) For we have not a high priest, who can not have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.

(LV) non enim habemus pontificem qui non possit conpati infirmitatibus nostris temptatum autem per omnia pro similitudine absque peccato

(BNV) Non enim habemus pontificem, qui non possit compati infirmitatibus nostris, tentatum autem per omnia secundum similitudinem absque peccato;Is there some other verse I’m missing? Otherwise, it is not contrary to Scripture (even Luke 2:52) that Jesus has perfect knowledge (insofar as a human mind and soul can have knowledge), or was a “perfect specimen” of mankind.

Except that an omniscient Jesus is not what the Gospel gives us: He admits his ignorance, & he asks questions. To make him out to be omniscient, is to make him inhuman, not a man, but an abortive mixture of God & man; it is to make him neither one nor the other, but a monstrosity. ​

Whatever else he was, he was fully human, & not a monstrosity.

 

[Verbum]

Hi Japhy,

Jesus is fully human and fully divine. But he was a divine person. One person, two natures. (The Trinity is three persons, one nature)

As God, Jesus knows everything. So the person Jesus knows everything. On the day of his birth, he could have started talking and preaching the gospel. But he chose not to live a life that would have been one long miracle.

So he grew in wisdom. How could he “grow” if he knows everything? Well, there is one thing that God does not have. That’s experimental knowlege. For example, God knows all about pain, but he never experienced pain. He knows all about thought, but he never experienced development of the mind or development of speech. Jesus acquired this experimental knowledge the same way we did. So he was truly human in every way… except sin.

Bottom line, the incarnation is a miracle of God and a mystery that our finite minds cannot fully understand, at least in this life. So we cannot understand how all this actually worked in the divine, but fully human, person that Jesus is. Let us humbly accept what the Scriptures say and strive to live in a way that one day we will be able to see God “face to face” and ask him all about it.

Verbum

 

[Harmony1988]

Jesus is ultimately God, but in a form which he took as human, so in doing so, as God he could never eternally die, but in that human form he also limited himself whilst on earth. Due to him having no sin he also had a very clear conscience and understanding therefore a profound insight, but he did not know ‘all’ whilst in his human form, he would have read the scriptures like all the other good jews, memorized, etc.

He would have made mistakes, for sure, as in falling down as a child, making errors in carpentry, these are not sins, but imperfections present in the human body he took with limited accuracy and etc. Did he sin, that is to say a manner which contradicts his divine form? No.

 

[japhy]

Except that an omniscient Jesus is not what the Gospel gives us: He admits his ignorance, & he asks questions.

But Jesus’s human soul enjoyed the beatific vision since the moment of his conception, and as such was incapable of “ignorance”. His soul is finite, so it could not at any moment contain the infinite knowledge contained in the beatific vision, but that does not equate to human ignorance.

See this document (paragraphs 1-8) for an explanation of that; also see The Consciousness of Christ (chapters 1 and 7 and 8 in particular) by the same author, Fr. William Most.

From the end of chapter 7 (“The Magisterium”):
Conclusions from the Magisterium

1. We must never say that He did not know some things. For the He is a divine Person.
2. The human soul, and so the human consciousness of Jesus, did enjoy the beatific vision from the first moment of human conception. That vision made known to Him all the members of His Mystical Body, of all centuries. It made known also His divine Sonship. It also made known to Him the day and hour of the parousia. In itself, the beatific vision contains all knowledge. Yet any created soul, human or angelic, even the human soul of Jesus, is finite. Hence, at any given moment, it will not contain infinite knowledge. So, in itself, that vision could omit a given point such as the parousaic day and hour. Mk 13:32 tells us that such is the case with the angels. However, the Magisterium insists that Jesus, even as man, did know the day and the hour.
3. Since, in the context, Pope Gregory the Great was speaking of the human knowledge of Jesus, we must take his statement, “Is there anything that the Wisdom of God does not know?” as meaning that Jesus, while not having infinite knowledge in His human soul, yet at all times knew all things as the Word, and that whatever pertained in any way to the matter on hand always registered in His human consciousness.
4. The human soul of Jesus enjoyed infused knowledge.

The doctrinal weight of the above statements was treated in the introductory part of this chapter. These teachings are theologically certain, and, according to Vatican II, require true internal assent.

 

[porthos11]

I often hear Heb. 4:15 cited as proof that Jesus (at least in his human nature) was “like us in all ways, except sin”. From here, people infer that Jesus, in his human nature, had imperfect wisdom (ignorance) or even error!

But that’s not what the verse says.
(RSV) For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

(NAB) For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way, yet without sin.

(KJV) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

(DR) For we have not a high priest, who can not have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.

(LV) non enim habemus pontificem qui non possit conpati infirmitatibus nostris temptatum autem per omnia pro similitudine absque peccato

(BNV) Non enim habemus pontificem, qui non possit compati infirmitatibus nostris, tentatum autem per omnia secundum similitudinem absque peccato;
Is there some other verse I’m missing? Otherwise, it is not contrary to Scripture (even Luke 2:52) that Jesus has perfect knowledge (insofar as a human mind and soul can have knowledge), or was a “perfect specimen” of mankind.

The popular saying is actually taken from two verses. The one you cite is the source of the latter part (“except sin”).

The first part of the popular saying is from Hebrews 2:17: “therefore, he had to become like his brothers in every way…”

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

But Jesus’s human soul enjoyed the beatific vision since the moment of his conception,

Only if this is consistent with the facts of human embryology. Doctrines which depend on inaccuracies about geography, history, biology, linguistics, etc., are not credible if they are to be believed now because they were articulated in a state of ignorance then. They are credible only if their defects can be made good without destroying the thing believed in the process.​

The BV is not possible where there is no intelligence. If a sperm has no intelligence, that sperm cannot enjoy the BV. If a Divine Incarnation is not to die the death of a thousand qualifications, it has to be a genuine incarnation - God has to be “enfleshed” as a genuinely human being. And that seems to rule out the idea of there having been an*** intelligent*** human biological “something” in the first stages of the Incarnation to enjoy the BV.

and as such was incapable of “ignorance”. His soul is finite, so it could not at any moment contain the infinite knowledge contained in the beatific vision, but that does not equate to human ignorance.

Jesus was fully & truly & totally human. His Soul was human. He asked questions. Therefore, His knowledge was limited; just as truly as ours is. He had no more knowledge therefore of nuclear fission, Jerry Springer, CERN, the EU, or the educational system of 1930’s Poland than Pilate or St. Peter. Nor did He to know any of these things: just as He knew no more of human biology or reproduction, or blindness or epilepsy or insanity or leprosy, than any other man of His time. Trying to make Him into a cross between & a walking encyclopaedia & an infinite Nobel laureate (not forgetting all the super-computers ever heard of) makes Him into something not human at all. ​

How can something utterly & totally alien to what men are, & know themselves to be, have any fellow-feeling with us ? Such a being is the polar opposite of what Hebrews 4.15 describes.

See this document (paragraphs 1-8) for an explanation of that;

The inexplicable cannot be explained.​

also see The Consciousness of Christ (chapters 1 and 7 and 8 in particular) by the same author, Fr. William Most.

From the end of chapter 7 (“The Magisterium”):Conclusions from the Magisterium1) We must never say that He did not know some things. For the He is a divine Person.

1. The human soul, and so the human consciousness of Jesus, did enjoy the beatific vision from the first moment of human conception. That vision made known to Him all the members of His Mystical Body, of all centuries. It made known also His divine Sonship. It also made known to Him the day and hour of the parousia. In itself, the beatific vision contains all knowledge. Yet any created soul, human or angelic, even the human soul of Jesus, is finite. Hence, at any given moment, it will not contain infinite knowledge. So, in itself, that vision could omit a given point such as the parousaic day and hour. Mk 13:32 tells us that such is the case with the angels. However, the Magisterium insists that Jesus, even as man, did know the day and the hour.

1. Since, in the context, Pope Gregory the Great was speaking of the human knowledge of Jesus, we must take his statement, “Is there anything that the Wisdom of God does not know?” as meaning that Jesus, while not having infinite knowledge in His human soul, yet at all times knew all things as the Word, and that whatever pertained in any way to the matter on hand always registered in His human consciousness.4) The human soul of Jesus enjoyed infused knowledge.The doctrinal weight of the above statements was treated in the introductory part of this chapter. These teachings are theologically certain, and, according to Vatican II, require true internal assent.

Well, I don’t believe anything that makes an avowal of ignorance into the opposite. And the Word Incarnate can’t be split into two non-communicating “zones of influence” as that (tortured) reasoning does with Him.​

As for the enjoyment of the beatific vision by Christ - what does that suggestion rest on ? Why can’t He have been as lacking in it as we are, & still be God ? This is the kind of tangle the Church gets into when it insists on going further than it can - the Incarnation did not take occur so that we might pick the brains of God Incarnate. To do so is irreverent. Adoration is called for, not this meddlesome & impertinent rationalism

To accept that the angels can be ignorant on the basis of Mark 13.32, while denying the truth of the same affirmation in the very same verse when applied to the Son of Man, is simply bad exegesis. It would be better to ignore the verse altogether, if it has to be so tortured

 

[japhy]

The first part of the popular saying is from Hebrews 2:17: “therefore, he had to become like his brothers in every way…”

Ah, thank you for that. That’s the verse I wasn’t seeing. Now then, is this taken to mean he became like to us in nature or condition (sin excluded)? In other words, was his human nature subject to our lessened condition because of the Fall?

I’m just trying to see how this teaching of Christ have the beatific vision (which has been present since at least Mystici Corporis Christi and was repeated twice afterwards by the same Pope Pius XII), which is related to safeguarding Catholics against mistaken beliefs in ignorance and fallibility in Jesus (which Pope Paul VI had the CDF teach against), is consonant with Scripture and Tradition.

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

Ah, thank you for that. That’s the verse I wasn’t seeing. Now then, is this taken to mean he became like to us in nature or condition (sin excluded)? In other words, was his human nature subject to our lessened condition because of the Fall?

I’m just trying to see how this teaching of Christ have the beatific vision (which has been present since at least Mystici Corporis Christi and was repeated twice afterwards by the same Pope Pius XII), which is related to safeguarding Catholics against mistaken beliefs in ignorance and fallibility in Jesus (which Pope Paul VI had the CDF teach against), is consonant with Scripture and Tradition.

Taken from the CCC. You can find it online Here

470 Because “human nature was assumed, not absorbed”,97 in the mysterious union of the Incarnation, the Church was led over the course of centuries to confess the full reality of Christ’s human soul, with its operations of intellect and will, and of his human body. In parallel fashion, she had to recall on each occasion that Christ’s human nature belongs, as his own, to the divine person of the Son of God, who assumed it. Everything that Christ is and does in this nature derives from “one of the Trinity”. The Son of God therefore communicates to his humanity his own personal mode of existence in the Trinity. In his soul as in his body, Christ thus expresses humanly the divine ways of the Trinity:98

**The Son of God. . . worked with human hands; he thought with a human mind. He acted with a human will, and with a human heart he loved. Born of the Virgin Mary, he has truly been made one of us, like to us in all things except sin.**  99

Christ’s soul and his human knowledge

471 Apollinarius of Laodicaea asserted that in Christ the divine Word had replaced the soul or spirit. Against this error the Church confessed that the eternal Son also assumed a rational, human soul.100

472 This human soul that the Son of God assumed is endowed with a true human knowledge. As such, this knowledge could not in itself be unlimited: it was exercised in the historical conditions of his existence in space and time. This is why the Son of God could, when he became man, “increase in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man”,101** and would even have to inquire for himself about what one in the human condition can learn only from experience**.102 This corresponded to the reality of his voluntary emptying of himself, taking “the form of a slave”.103

473 But at the same time, this truly human knowledge of God’s Son expressed the divine life of his person.104 "The human nature of God’s Son, not by itself but by its union with the Word, knew and showed forth in itself everything that pertains to God."105 Such is first of all the case with the intimate and immediate knowledge that the Son of God made man has of his Father.106 The Son in his human knowledge also showed the divine penetration he had into the secret thoughts of human hearts.107

474 By its union to the divine wisdom in the person of the Word incarnate, **Christ enjoyed in his human knowledge the fullness of understanding of the eternal plans he had come to reveal.108 What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.**109

Christ’s human will

475 Similarly, at the sixth ecumenical council, Constantinople III in 681, the Church confessed that Christ possesses two wills and two natural operations, divine and human. They are not opposed to each other, but cooperate in such a way that the Word made flesh willed humanly in obedience to his Father all that he had decided divinely with the Father and the Holy Spirit for our salvation.****110 Christ’s human will "does not resist or oppose but rather submits to his divine and almighty will."111

Jesus said - If you have seen me you have seen the Father

Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? The person who has seen me has seen the Father. So how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

There is more starting at Paragraph 461 - 469 in the CCC.

I can’t state it any better than the CCC, so does this help?

Peace

John

edit: BTW - if you go to the CCC and scroll down, you will find the Scripture references, and such.

 

[japhy]

Taken from the CCC. You can find it online Here

There is more starting at Paragraph 461 - 469 in the CCC. I can’t state it any better than the CCC, so does this help?

Yes! Very much so!