"I and the Father are one"

[josh987654321]

Someone asked me on another thread, how Jesus and God could be one, when Jesus said Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

It was put -

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thank you in advanced
Josh.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Someone asked me on another thread, how Jesus and God could be one, when Jesus said Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

It was put -

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thank you in advanced
Josh.

The Catholic Church teaches that the human nature of Christ knew only those things the Father chose to reveal. This was one of those things God did not choose to reveal. Remember that Christ had a Divine nature as well, which was one with the Father. Yet the two natures were separate even though the Divine nature and the human were one person and that Person was Divine and one with the Father. Other passages in the Scriptures pointed out that Christ, in his human nature, had to learn the things all human beings had to learn. So while His Divine nature revealed some things to His human nature, the Divine chose not to reveal everything. And we don’t know the reason for that. But it is clear that the Divinity chose not to reveal the time of the end of the world.

Linus2nd

 

[chimo]

Someone asked me on another thread, how Jesus and God could be one, when Jesus said Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

It was put -

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thank you in advanced
Josh.

It is probable that Jesus knows of the end of the world. It is impossible for Him not to know. What I believe He is saying in this Scripture is He is not the One to reveal it. He knows but He is not going to reveal the exact time. Remember that Jesus said that many will come in His Name to declare this end. Since Jesus has told us in advance He is not the one to reveal this we can ignore all those who said they know or those who think they have received something from Jesus. The devil can be very sly to give us many false messages about the End. He does this so as to not to encourage faith. Only the Father will announce the End and the Father is not going to tell you, me or anyone else. He will only announce it to His Son. The Son even though He knows has chosen not to reveal it and awaits for the Father’s announcement. Jesus knows of the End. He is also God. Why would Jesus not know when He has given so much prophecy about what will occur before the End? He knows. But He isn’t telling. That privilege to announce it only belongs to the Father.

 

[ASonOfGod]

Someone asked me on another thread, how Jesus and God could be one, when Jesus said Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

It was put -

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thank you in advanced
Josh.

Alright Josh, the CORRECT answer is this. The “son” is born into this plane/reality, at the age of 30 he goes to his “priest” and his priest “opens his crown/baptizes him” and allowed the holy spirit/ether/energy/consciousness of the father “jump into his body”.

Luke 3:22
King James Version (KJV)
22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Matthew 3:16
New King James Version (NKJV)
16 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He[a] saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him.

John 1:32-34
New International Version (NIV)
32 Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. 33 And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.”[a]

So, there you have it. "Me and the Father are one, because the father jumped/descended into his vessel.

 

[Augustine3]

Someone asked me on another thread, how Jesus and God could be one, when Jesus said Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

It was put -

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thank you in advanced
Josh.

G’day Mate! I’m from Sydney, Australia. aussie aussie aussie oi oi oi

Dr. Scot Hahn explains this to be a hyperbole. Jesus had also used hyperboles at other times, such as:

If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple – Luke 14:26

Jesus taught us love everybody including our enemies yet commands us to hate our family? Of course not! Hyperboles were common in the Jewish culture back then (as it still is in my own home country, Lebanon). Jesus is simply settling the matter with his followers not to waste their time in trying to figure out or enquire when the Son of Man returns. Jesus said elsewhere “It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established by his own authority” – Acts 1:7

The Catechism of the catholic Church tells us:

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. What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.

God bless you.

 

[josh987654321]

G’day Mate! I’m from Sydney, Australia. aussie aussie aussie oi oi oi

lol,

Dr. Scot Hahn explains this to be a hyperbole. Jesus had also used hyperboles at other times, such as:

If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple – Luke 14:26

Jesus taught us love everybody including our enemies yet commands us to hate our family? Of course not! Hyperboles were common in the Jewish culture back then (as it still is in my own home country, Lebanon). Jesus is simply settling the matter with his followers not to waste their time in trying to figure out or enquire when the Son of Man returns. Jesus said elsewhere “It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established by his own authority” – Acts 1:7

The Catechism of the catholic Church tells us:

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. What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.

God bless you.

Thank you very much Augustine3, that explains it well I believe

Thank you all for your replies.

Josh.

 

[Aristocles_X]

The Catholic Church teaches that the human nature of Christ knew only those things the Father chose to reveal. This was one of those things God did not choose to reveal. Remember that Christ had a **Divine nature **as well, which was one with the Father. Yet **the two natures were separate even though the Divine nature and the human were one **person and that Person was Divine and one with the Father. Other passages in the Scriptures pointed out that Christ, in his human nature, had to learn the things all human beings had to learn. So while His Divine nature revealed some things to His human nature, the Divine chose not to reveal everything. And we don’t know the reason for that. But it is clear that the Divinity chose not to reveal the time of the end of the world.

Linus2nd

So many contradictions.

esp this

the two natures were separate even though the Divine nature and the human were one

It seems like what you are saying is that the Son part of the Trinity was in a stand by mode while the human part controlled the entire body receiving knowledge from another the father part of the Trinity. Ofcourse non of this is found in the Gospels and are later attempts to try and solve this major theological disaster which is a result of the evolving Jesus from a Prophet(mark) to a Super Prophetic Messiah (Luke and Matthew) to a Demi God (John).

Peace.

 

[Gorgias]

Alright Josh, the CORRECT answer is this. The “son” is born into this plane/reality, at the age of 30 he goes to his “priest” and his priest “opens his crown/baptizes him” and allowed the holy spirit/ether/energy/consciousness of the father “jump into his body”.

Just to make sure that no one gets confused… this is clearly not what the Church teaches. The notion that Jesus doesn’t have a divine nature of His own, but rather, that the divine nature belongs to the Father, is a tenet of the heresy of Arianism, which the Church condemned at the 1st Council of Nicaea. The idea that Christ’s divine nature overcame and overwhelmed His human nature sounds like the heresy of Eutychianism, which was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon.

 

[Gorgias]

It seems like what you are saying is that the Son part of the Trinity was in a stand by mode while the human part controlled the entire body receiving knowledge from another the father part of the Trinity.

No, that’s not it at all. Jesus has a divine nature and a human nature, being fully God and fully man. In his human nature, which was not in conflict with or mixed into his divine nature, He did not have the omnipotence of His divine nature.

Ofcourse non of this is found in the Gospels

Aah… but it is found in Scripture! “Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself.” (Philippians 2:5-8).

and are later attempts to try and solve this major theological disaster which is a result of the evolving Jesus from a Prophet(mark) to a Super Prophetic Messiah (Luke and Matthew) to a Demi God (John).

Except that this isn’t a reasonable summary of the Evangelists’ thought. Mark didn’t just see Jesus as a ‘Prophet’: in Mk 1:3, we see that John’s mission wasn’t preparation for a ‘prophet’, but “to prepare the way of the Lord”. Jesus himself asserts his divinity; in Mk 2, the Pharisees rightly object that "God alone can forgive sins?” (Mk 2:7) Jesus doesn’t dispute this conclusion, but rather, simply asserts that He "has authority to forgive sins on earth” (Mk 2:8); in other words, it’s true that only Godo can forgive sins – that’s why Jesus can forgive sins!

In Mk 2:28, Jesus asserts his divine authority in a different way; pointing to the ability of the priest to give David the showbread, Jesus asserts “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath;” in other words, He doesn’t require anyone else’s authority – He himself is lord of the sabbath! Since the sabbath was decreed by God, no one else could have the authority to properly call himself ‘lord of the sabbath’… unless he was God!

There are many occasions in Mark in which Jesus calls himself the ‘Son of Man’ and others call him the ‘Son of God’ (including God himself! ); now, you might retort that these titles do not imply divinity. However, that’s not at all how the Jewish leaders understood these titles! When Jesus admits that He is the ‘Messiah’, the ‘son of the Blessed One’, and the ‘Son of Man’ who will be ‘seated at the right hand of the Power’, what is the response of the high priest? That He’s making unsubstantiated claims? That He’s teaching things that are incorrect? No – he tears his garments and exclaims, “you have heard the blasphemy!” What’s blasphemy? An insult against God – Jesus is claiming for himself a status alongside God, and this is what the high priest cannot bear. Was it a true claim, though? Mark puts the truth of this assertion into the mouth of the centurian who witnessed the crucifixion and Jesus’ death: “truly this man was the Son of God!”

So… even the assertion that Mark does not see Jesus’ divinity doesn’t stand up to scrutiny!

Blessings,
G.

 

[PJM]

=josh987654321;11758545]Someone asked me on another thread, how Jesus and God could be one, when Jesus said Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

It was put -

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thank you in advanced
Josh.

Here;s the mystery explained:

Jesus Christ alone has two complete and Perfect Natures

Jesus is ALWAYS God
Jesus is also a man; like us in every way but sin.

In the passage you quote Jesus speaks in HIS HUMAN NATURE as a man; BUT as God He would certainly know.

 

[jochoa]

How can one God both know something and not know the same thing? Father and Son are different. If they are different, and there is only one God…

How would you answer this?

Thanks for sharing the interesting questions! I would enjoy hearing your thoughts on the following understanding of the Holy Trinity.

One God can both know something and not know the same thing because the one God, the person who created everything, is three distinct persons, who are each the person who created everything. Of the three distinct persons, the second person sacrifices all-knowledge, without sacrificing all-wisdom, by being the only begotten Son of the Father, in order to fulfill the purpose for creation: Eternal Friendship.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

No, that’s not it at all. Jesus has a divine nature and a human nature, being fully God and fully man. In his human nature, which was not in conflict with or mixed into his divine nature, He did not have the omnipotence of His divine nature.

Aah… but it is found in Scripture! “Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself.” (Philippians 2:5-8).

Except that this isn’t a reasonable summary of the Evangelists’ thought. Mark didn’t just see Jesus as a ‘Prophet’: in Mk 1:3, we see that John’s mission wasn’t preparation for a ‘prophet’, but “to prepare the way of the Lord”. Jesus himself asserts his divinity; in Mk 2, the Pharisees rightly object that "God alone can forgive sins?” (Mk 2:7) Jesus doesn’t dispute this conclusion, but rather, simply asserts that He "has authority to forgive sins on earth” (Mk 2:8); in other words, it’s true that only Godo can forgive sins – that’s why Jesus can forgive sins!

In Mk 2:28, Jesus asserts his divine authority in a different way; pointing to the ability of the priest to give David the showbread, Jesus asserts “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath;” in other words, He doesn’t require anyone else’s authority – He himself is lord of the sabbath! Since the sabbath was decreed by God, no one else could have the authority to properly call himself ‘lord of the sabbath’… unless he was God!

There are many occasions in Mark in which Jesus calls himself the ‘Son of Man’ and others call him the ‘Son of God’ (including God himself! ); now, you might retort that these titles do not imply divinity. However, that’s not at all how the Jewish leaders understood these titles! When Jesus admits that He is the ‘Messiah’, the ‘son of the Blessed One’, and the ‘Son of Man’ who will be ‘seated at the right hand of the Power’, what is the response of the high priest? That He’s making unsubstantiated claims? That He’s teaching things that are incorrect? No – he tears his garments and exclaims, “you have heard the blasphemy!” What’s blasphemy? An insult against God – Jesus is claiming for himself a status alongside God, and this is what the high priest cannot bear. Was it a true claim, though? Mark puts the truth of this assertion into the mouth of the centurian who witnessed the crucifixion and Jesus’ death: “truly this man was the Son of God!”

So… even the assertion that Mark does not see Jesus’ divinity doesn’t stand up to scrutiny!

Blessings,
G.

Magnificent post!

 

[Aristocles_X]

No, that’s not it at all. Jesus has a divine nature and a human nature, being fully God and fully man. In his human nature, which was not in conflict with or mixed into his divine nature, He did not have the omnipotence of His divine nature.

Aah… but it is found in Scripture! “Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself.” (Philippians 2:5-8).

Except that this isn’t a reasonable summary of the Evangelists’ thought. Mark didn’t just see Jesus as a ‘Prophet’: in Mk 1:3, we see that John’s mission wasn’t preparation for a ‘prophet’, but “to prepare the way of the Lord”. Jesus himself asserts his divinity; in Mk 2, the Pharisees rightly object that "God alone can forgive sins?” (Mk 2:7) Jesus doesn’t dispute this conclusion, but rather, simply asserts that He "has authority to forgive sins on earth” (Mk 2:8); in other words, it’s true that only Godo can forgive sins – that’s why Jesus can forgive sins!

In Mk 2:28, Jesus asserts his divine authority in a different way; pointing to the ability of the priest to give David the showbread, Jesus asserts “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath;” in other words, He doesn’t require anyone else’s authority – He himself is lord of the sabbath! Since the sabbath was decreed by God, no one else could have the authority to properly call himself ‘lord of the sabbath’… unless he was God!

There are many occasions in Mark in which Jesus calls himself the ‘Son of Man’ and others call him the ‘Son of God’ (including God himself! ); now, you might retort that these titles do not imply divinity. However, that’s not at all how the Jewish leaders understood these titles! When Jesus admits that He is the ‘Messiah’, the ‘son of the Blessed One’, and the ‘Son of Man’ who will be ‘seated at the right hand of the Power’, what is the response of the high priest? That He’s making unsubstantiated claims? That He’s teaching things that are incorrect? No – he tears his garments and exclaims, “you have heard the blasphemy!” What’s blasphemy? An insult against God – Jesus is claiming for himself a status alongside God, and this is what the high priest cannot bear. Was it a true claim, though? Mark puts the truth of this assertion into the mouth of the centurian who witnessed the crucifixion and Jesus’ death: “truly this man was the Son of God!”

So… even the assertion that Mark does not see Jesus’ divinity doesn’t stand up to scrutiny!

Blessings,
G.

Greetings. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I am on my phone laying in bed so expect a lazy reply

Thank you for confirming what i said. You said ahh thats not it and than you went on to say the same thing i said. In catholic theology Jesus was both man and God and you agree with this. You also agree when he was on earth the human part was in control. So that does indeed mean the son head was on stand by mode. Man can compress God so he cannot use his power. However the problem is solved by having the father upstairs who is suppose to be the same as the one compressed inside Jesus and yet a different person

As for the passage you posted here is The message transkation.

Think of yourselves the way Christ Jesus thought of himself. He had equal status with God but didn’t think so much of himself that he had to cling to the advantages of that status no matter what.

So the passage is open for multiple interpretations.

As for the evolution of Jesus. You focus on the small pixel and ignore the big picture. You quote a verse here and there instead of seein it mark 1-16. Yes he was called lord however shortly after he was baptised by John showing the author viewed Jesus imperfect and in need of baptism this evolves in the 2 synoptics with a taste of Q when we come to John demi sun god Jesus is in need for no baptism.

Forgiving sin? The deciples received the same abillity.

As for Jesus remaining silent not true at all. He explained to them that the son of man also hadthe abillity to forgive sin. This shows their understanding of scripture was wrong according to Jesus.

6-7 Some religion scholars sitting there started whispering among themselves, “He can’t talk that way! That’s blasphemy! God and only God can forgive sins.”

8-12 Jesus knew right away what they were thinking, and said, “Why are you so skeptical? Which is simpler: to say to the paraplegic, ‘I forgive your sins,’ or say, ‘Get up, take your stretcher, and start walking’? Well, just so it’s clear that I’m the Son of Man and authorized to do either, or both . . .” (he looked now at the paraplegic), “Get up. Pick up your stretcher and go home.” And the man did it—got up, grabbed his stretcher, and walked out, with everyone there watching him. They rubbed their eyes, incredulous—and then praised God, saying, “We’ve never seen anything like this!”

As for the rabbi tearing his robs. Keep in mind this is a fictional story and therfor the reaction of the bad guys (the jews) no way represents the jews. However claiming to be the messiah would be big time blasphemy(in the ot disobeying the king was seen as blaspheming). Nothing to do with claiming to be God.

As for the lord of the sabbath. In verse 28 he simply says that he is master/lord as he is the son of man. Since he is the son of man he can give commands on the sabbath as he is lord and also lord of the sabbath. Nothing to do with being God.

 

[Gorgias]

Hi, Aristocles! I see that you won’t be able to respond to this post, but I wanted to reply to your response to me nevertheless…!

Thank you for confirming what i said.

I did no such thing.

You said ahh thats not it and than you went on to say the same thing i said. … You also agree when he was on earth the human part was in control.

No, that’s not accurate. I don’t agree with the notion that “the human part [of Jesus] was in control” (or that the “son head was on stand-by mode”).

However the problem is solved by having the father upstairs who is suppose to be the same as the one compressed inside Jesus and yet a different person

Christian theology does not suggest that there is a nature “compressed” inside Jesus, nor that there are two ‘persons’ in Jesus: Jesus has a divine nature and a human nature; but Jesus is a single, integral person.

As for the passage you posted here is The message transkation.

Might I make a suggestion? It is difficult, as a Christian, to have a non-Christian just walk up and say, “hey, man… let me tell you what your scriptures mean.” After all, if I were to presume to tell you what the Quran said, would you respond, “wow! thanks for explaining my holy writings to me!”

Certainly, Paul is advising Christians how to act. However, you’re glossing over the details of what Paul is saying about Jesus, which is context of our discussion here.

You focus on the small pixel and ignore the big picture. You quote a verse here and there instead of seein it mark 1-16.

I think that I’ve demonstrated that, throughout the Gospel of Mark, the evangelist shows what he thinks of Jesus – that he was the Son of God and that this means ‘divinity’, not just ‘prophet’.

Yes he was called lord however shortly after he was baptised by John showing the author viewed Jesus imperfect

That’s an odd perspective! After all, immediately prior to Jesus’ baptism, John says, "I am not worthy to stoop and loosen the thongs of his sandals… he will baptize you with the holy Spirit.” It’s a shame that you won’t have the opportunity to explain how this shows that Mark sees Jesus as “imperfect”, since, on the face of it, the natural conclusion is that Mark sees Jesus as far greater than the Baptist himself!

and in need of baptism this evolves in the 2 synoptics with a taste of Q when we come to John demi sun god Jesus is in need for no baptism.

Yes, in John, Jesus is not baptized. However, your claim was that Mark sees Jesus simply as a ‘prophet’; we’ve seen that the Gospel of Mark sees Jesus as far more than that!

Forgiving sin? The deciples received the same abillity.

Thank you for pointing this out! Tell me… from whom did the disciples receive this ability? From Jesus! Yes, they received an ability – which only God has – from Jesus! What does this tell you? Clearly, it means that Jesus not only has the authority to forgive sins (a divine authority), but also, He has the authority to pass this on to humans. That’s an amazing point of evidence of Jesus’ divinity! Thanks for helping us recognize this…

As for Jesus remaining silent not true at all. He explained to them that the son of man also hadthe abillity to forgive sin. This shows their understanding of scripture was wrong according to Jesus.

Yet another important point: if the Scriptures came from God, and man misinterpreted them, who would have the ability and authority to correct an incorrect interpretation of Scripture? Yep, you’ve got it… God! Thanks!

6-7 Some religion scholars sitting there started whispering among themselves, “He can’t talk that way! That’s blasphemy! God and only God can forgive sins.”

As for the rabbi tearing his robs. Keep in mind this is a fictional story and therfor the reaction of the bad guys (the jews) no way represents the jews.

Umm… pardon? A “fictional story”? And how, exactly, have you arrived at this conclusion?

However claiming to be the messiah would be big time blasphemy

Interesting! Boy, those Jews are really silly, aren’t they! After all, they’re all intensely anticipating the arrival of the Messiah, and yet, anyone who would come and claim that title for himself would be guilty of blasphemy! C’mon, now… you realize that your assertion just makes no sense… right?

As for the lord of the sabbath. In verse 28 he simply says that he is master/lord as he is the son of man. Since he is the son of man he can give commands on the sabbath as he is lord and also lord of the sabbath. Nothing to do with being God.

This doesn’t hold up, either: no previous Jewish king or lord ever asserted that he was “lord of the sabbath” – not even David or Solomon! Claiming to be the “lord of the sabbath” is precisely an indication that the lordship of Jesus is above and beyond what any normal human might command!

Blessings,
G.

 

[PJM]

=jochoa;11764246]Thanks for sharing the interesting questions! I would enjoy hearing your thoughts on the following understanding of the Holy Trinity.

One God can both know something and not know the same thing because the one God, the person who created everything, is three distinct persons, who are each the person who created everything. Of the three distinct persons, the second person sacrifices all-knowledge, without sacrificing all-wisdom, by being the only begotten Son of the Father, in order to fulfill the purpose for creation: Eternal Friendship.

GREAT post

But I don’t think so. Christ in His Human Nature could and likely did do that; BUT NOT Christ as the second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

So many contradictions.

esp this

It seems like what you are saying is that the Son part of the Trinity was in a stand by mode while the human part controlled the entire body receiving knowledge from another the father part of the Trinity. Ofcourse non of this is found in the Gospels and are later attempts to try and solve this major theological disaster which is a result of the evolving Jesus from a Prophet(mark) to a Super Prophetic Messiah (Luke and Matthew) to a Demi God (John).

Peace.

Sorry you can’t understand plain language when you hear it. The Scriptures make it plain that Jesus had a complete human nature and a complete Divine Nature. The Divine Nature was the same Nature that the Father had and the Holy Spirit had. The Three Persons differed only in their " Origins " and their Relatinships with One Another. But what one did or what one had, they all did and had. So Jesus was correct to say He and the Father were One. He could also have said that He and the Holy Spirit were One, for the Divine Nature of each was the Same.

But it was the special Office of the Second Person of the Trinity to assume a human nature. So Jesus was both the Son of Man and the Son of God.( the Father ). Jesus, as Son of Man, had to acquire the human knowledge and experience of a man through his real human nature. At the same time the Father was Revealing to Him all the things concerning His destiny as King, Prophet, and Priest, His mission as the Savior of mankind. The Father also revealed to His human nature His Divine Personhood and His Divine Nature and His Relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit. But the Father did not reveal to Christ’s human nature everything. One of the things He did not reveal was the exact time of the end of the world, the time when Jesus would come to judge the world.

So Jesus was One Person, the Second Person of the Trinity. To make this and everything else absolutely clear Jesus Himself told the Apostles he would send the Advocate ( the Holy Spirit ) Who would teach them all they needed to know concerning the things necessary for salvation and what they needed to know about Himself, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit would Reveal all through the Church which Jesus had established - and it would teach all things needful and good without error. This Revelation is what is known as Tradition in the Catholic Church.

This teaching of Tradition continues to this day through the Magisterium of the Church. This Tradition is what the Scriptures were written from, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. So the Holy Scriptures do not contain absolutely everything that God has Revealed in all its full blown completeness. For example, the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary into Heaven were not things mentioned in the Scriptures, yet were always believed by the faithful. Such things are examples of the Revelation which exists in Tradition but are not explicit in the Scriptures. This is the part of Revelation which the Holy Spirit " will make clear. This is what Christ meant when He said that the Advocate " will will guide you in all Truth…"

You see, without the guidance of the Holy Spirit, there would not even be a Scripture at all. It is " by His hand " that the Scriptures were written, as well as the things that have been written by the Magisterium of the Church.

The things I have told you and that Gorgias and others have told you have been clarified and explained by the Magisterium. It is always possible to quibble over the exact meaning of the Scriptures. But the Magisterium has made all clear and will continue to make clear things still, possibly, unclear. The Magisterium is the living voice of the Holy Spirit, Who will guide Christ’s Church in all Truth.

It would be well for you to listen, because the Church is speaking to you and to all men. Upon Her the salvation of all rests. Yes, Jesus was a Prophet, a King, a Priest. But He was also God Almighty, by reason of His Divine Nature. He and the Father are One, as He said. And " at the name of Jesus all men shall bow. "

Linus2nd

 

[jochoa]

GREAT post

But I don’t think so. Christ in His Human Nature could and likely did do that; BUT NOT Christ as the second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

Thanks for sharing your insight!

To share some Catholic Theology which supports my understanding of the Holy Trinity, please consider the following:
According to the Nicene Creed, God (the second person) is begotten. I propose that the purpose for begetting himself is to sacrifice ALL-knowledge, without sacrificing all-wisdom, which is a form of all-knowledge. Because wisdom knows that one cannot experience the fullness of love, if one knows every single thing, past, present, and future about another.

CCC#457 “…Did they not move God to descend to human nature…”
The manly person of Christ is still fully God, therefore Christ’s Divine Nature can do this.

Thanks for your time and consideration, and I look forward to further discussion!

 

[josh987654321]

The Catholic Church teaches that the human nature of Christ knew only those things the Father chose to reveal. This was one of those things God did not choose to reveal. Remember that Christ had a Divine nature as well, which was one with the Father. Yet the two natures were separate even though the Divine nature and the human were one person and that Person was Divine and one with the Father. Other passages in the Scriptures pointed out that Christ, in his human nature, had to learn the things all human beings had to learn. So while His Divine nature revealed some things to His human nature, the Divine chose not to reveal everything. And we don’t know the reason for that. But it is clear that the Divinity chose not to reveal the time of the end of the world.

Linus2nd

After your second post, I understand completely what your saying here now and that makes much sense, thank you Linusthe2nd.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Thorns]

I highly doubt Jesus didnt/doesnt know the time of the end, He even gave clues as to what signs would appear and indicate the beginning of the end. So I believe He does know. IMO What he stated that “only the Father knows” was more of His way of telling the apostles, “none of your business.”

 

[PJM]

=jochoa;11766792]Thanks for sharing your insight!

To share some Catholic Theology which supports my understanding of the Holy Trinity, please consider the following:
According to the Nicene Creed, God (the second person) is begotten. I propose that the purpose for begetting himself is to sacrifice ALL-knowledge, without sacrificing all-wisdom, which is a form of all-knowledge. Because wisdom knows that one cannot experience the fullness of love, if one knows every single thing, past, present, and future about another.

CCC#457 “…Did they not move God to descend to human nature…”
The manly person of Christ is still fully God, therefore Christ’s Divine Nature can do this.

Thanks for your time and consideration, and I look forward to further discussion!

And THANK you my friend!

God Bless
Patrick