If Jesus was divine, why didn't he know all things on Earth?

[ineedofmercy]

I think Jesus had to experience learning as part of the human condition
But he was also aware of things we could never know

 

[lilypadrees]

I mean no disrespect, @Roguish. There is nothing disparaging in my asking a simple question regarding two of Buddhism’s/Hinduism’s avatars.

Catholic and Protestant Christians alike, believe that Jesus is Lord. Jesus is God. We know that Jesus, the unblemished Lamb of God, died on the Cross for our sins. There is nothing that compares to that. Jesus not only died on the Cross out of His immense Love for us, He also conquered death by rising 3 days later.

The Buddha and the Krishna, if they truly existed, have many devotees. BUT although they may be seen as prophets, possibly gods by those who show such devotion to them, they areNOT gods. Neither had the ability to die for the forgiveness of the sins of the world’s inhabitants.

 

[Gorgias]

It’s sad to see that for most Catholics a defense of Catholicism typically requires disparaging talk of other religions.

To be fair, @BenSinner asked precisely for a comparison between Jesus, Buddha, and Krishna. So, in a Christian framework, we point out that Jesus said and did things that they didn’t. Why is that “disparaging”?

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?

There’s a certain whiff of relativism in the air… can you smell it?

Here’s the thing: our discussion is about a matter whose answer has a single, definite truth value. It’s not a question of personal taste (e.g., “is pistachio ice cream delicious?”), which does not have a single ‘true’ answer, but only personal opinions. Rather, the question “is Jesus divine” requires an answer which is either ‘yes’ or ‘no’… and which then leads us to the answers to other questions (e.g., “is Buddha who Buddhists say he is?”).

Now, people’s answers to the question will vary – some will say “yes, Jesus is divine” and others will say, “no, Christianity gets it wrong and Buddhism gets it right” – but that doesn’t change the dynamic here: there is one correct answer, and that means that some folks will be right and others wrong in their answers. That doesn’t ‘denigrate’ others – it just means that some folks hold to answers which are incorrect. No shame in that.

 

[AlNg]

omniscience is not a property of God the Son.

That is difficult to understand. That God the Son, even though He is God and that He is One with the Father, is not omniscient.
Jesus said that I and the Father are One.
But how can that be taken literally if:
God the Father is omniscient, but God the Son is not.
God the Father is a different Person from God the Son. The two are not One Person.
God the Father has a different will from God the Son (Let thy will, not mine be done).
God the Father is pure Spirit, but God the Son is human and divine.
God the Father knows the day or the hour, but the Son does not.
On the Cross, God the Son asks, My God, My God, why hast thou foresaken Me?
Do these passages make it difficult to understand how God the Father and Jesus can be One in an exact literal sense?