L
lilypadrees
Guest
What makes you think He didn’t possess all Truth?
- Status
L
lilypadrees
Guest
Your profile says you are Catholic. But you don’t sound Catholic.Gorgias:
Because he claimed to be The Way, The Life, and the Truth…yet he didn’t possess all truth. It sounds like he is just an extremely intelligent person, but not Truth itself
So why should one trust his word over someone like Buddha or Krishna who do claim to be all-knowing?
You asked why we should trust Jesus over Buddha and Krishna who claim to be all knowing. I ask you, why should we trust Buddha and Krishna over Jesus who truly is all knowing?
Jesus chose to become like us in every way but sin. He chose to learn and to grow in knowledge and to be obedient to His mother and Joseph. He didn’t have to because He is God. He could have said, “I’m better than this. I’m God. Let these humans fend for themselves.”
Instead, He chose to become one of us, to live among us, to love us as no one else has loved us. He came to this earth to die for us so that our sins would be forgiven. The unblemished Lamb of God.
What did the Buddha and Krishna do in comparison? Nada.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
In taking on human flesh, Jesus set aside many perks of divinity, so as to more authentically suffer as a human would suffer, even to the extent of feeling abandoned by his father on the cross. It is not so hard to imagine that he also set aside (temporarily) knowledge of things on earth that no human in his situation would know. There were some exceptions, like his knowing that the disciples would find a man walking a donkey who would lend it to them for his entry into Jerusalem. But for most all other facts that he would know through omniscience, it seems he set aside that benefit while incarnate.
B
BenSinner
Guest
Did he ‘regain’ that divine perogative after his ressurection?
S
Start
Guest
Other Saint were able to do those things to and they were not divine.
G
Gorgias
Guest
That’s a great question! To the best of my recollection, I don’t think that Divine Revelation tells us the answer.
A
AlNg
Guest
Jesus said that only the Father knows the day or the hour.
L
lilypadrees
Guest
@AINg, I already stated He didn’t know the day or the hour Heaven and Earth would pass away. What has that got to do with your claim that He doesn’t possess all truth? Did He claim to possess that knowledge? No, He stated that only the Father knew the answer to that one.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
What did Jesus teach that wasn’t truth??? Examples please, otherwise this thread is a nonsense thread full of baseless conjecture.
A
AlNg
Guest
If someone does not know the day or the hour, would that person possess all knowledge?
A second question has to do with growing in wisdom. If someone grows in wisdom, would that mean that at one time in the past, he did not possess all wisdom?
A second question has to do with growing in wisdom. If someone grows in wisdom, would that mean that at one time in the past, he did not possess all wisdom?
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
If you asked me a question, and I replied, “I defer the answer to that question to my Dad”, would that mean that I’m ignorant?
In. His. Human. Nature.
I don’t know how often we can give that answer before you see it.
Last edited:
A
AlNg
Guest
Irrelevant and immaterial to the question at hand. It is not the same as saying only my Dad knows, and no one else does.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Not really.
There’s a certain tension between “the Father and I are one” and “about that day and hour… only the Father knows”. One way of taking it – the way you’re suggesting – is that Jesus isn’t who He says He is. The other way of taking it is to take Jesus at His word… and conclude that He’s deferring to the Father.
You’re free to decide that Jesus was a liar and a fraud. Good luck with that one.
A
AlNg
Guest
Nice way of misrepresenting alternative arguments.
G
Gorgias
Guest
OK. Please represent them more accurately, then. After all, you’re the one who said that Jesus was ‘intelligent’ but does not possess divine all-knowledge.
Last edited:
A
AlNg
Guest
Your arguments involve misquoting people and misrepresenting what they have attempted to discuss.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Ooh! In a sense, you’re correct! I’m ascribing @BenSinner’s statements to you! Sorry!
On the other hand, you are advancing the same arguments that @BenSinner has advanced in this thread. So… birds of a feather…?
L
Le_Cracquere
Guest
The subject is paradoxical in the classical sense–that is, in the sense of two seeming opposites that aren’t really (such as “cruel to be kind”). I doubt there was anything that Christ couldn’t have chosen to have known had He wanted. At the same time, being fully human as well as fully divine, it’s possible that He chose to be as limited as your average human in matters that weren’t crucial or related to His mission.
R
Roguish
Guest
It’s sad to see that for most Catholics a defense of Catholicism typically requires disparaging talk of other religions. Why can’t you defend Catholicism on its own merits? Must you trample on the beliefs on bilions of others in order to cement your own? Is it not enough for your own beliefs to work for you?
N
njlisa
Guest
I thought of this passage from Philippians Chapter 2:6-8 (NABRE):
… 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, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.
… 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, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.
- Status