J
- Status
J
jcrichton
Guest
…next, you are going to tell us that He traveled abroad and spent time studying the various Eastern religions, I suppose???
You continue to ascribe human imperfection to God; your claims are just full of human intellectualism, aren’t they? …the first miracle is preceded by “…not yet time…” You concern yourself with human ways and time frames and you forget that to Christ a thousand years is but a day.
Granted, Scriptures do not reveal everything about God and the reasons to everything He does… yet, when man begins to determine for God what God “really” mean/meant/should have done, man is no doubt treading in anti-theo paths; the anti-Christ is he who denies that Christ came in the flesh, that Christ is the Son of God, and that Christ is the Messiah.
Sadly, neoChristians are polluted by the world as they believe that they can determine God’s Will and Calendar.
Rejection of the Word is rejection of Christ, Who happens to be the Resurrection and Life!
…you cantradict Scriptures and you do not even blink… wow, how presumptuous!
Maran atha!
Angel
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Mary didn’t order the water. Her only instructions to the servants was to “do whatever He tells you”. Mary simply knew that Jesus would fix the problem. She didn’t know by what means.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
By saying “He knows his Bible”, I am saying that “He knows the Bible”. Usually I try to hint when I’m joking, but I admire those that study the Bible and know it so well. I wish we Catholics knew it better.
J
jcrichton
Guest
…since it was Mary who wanted to get involved not Jesus, I made a leap…
You are correct. But how do you suppose Mary thought that Jesus would resolve the problem? …they were poor (contrary to what some believe a town carpenter did not make a killing in Jesus’ days); Jesus did not seem to be connected (Scriptures speak about Him returning home with His parents and living with them as an obedient Son; this implies that He may have had mad skills with wood, pegs, and adhesives, not wine or people in the industry…); so was Mary simply one of those overly possitive Moms who believe their own exagerated stories about their children’s abilities or did she know that Jesus was God? (Consider St. Luke 1:26-55)
Sadly, too many times we divorce the Holy Spirit from the Holy Scriptures and we read them in the vacuum of man’s intellect.
Maran atha!
Angel
J
jcrichton
Guest
I agree that Catholics are way laxed when it comes to the Bible… but my query was to his interpretation of Scriptures–one can be cognizant of something without receiving the full benefit it provides…
Maran atha!
Angel
N
NotWorthy
Guest
If God could create something out of nothing, why would Mary think that Jesus needed water to make wine. I have no doubt that Mary understand (to some level, as much as her human-ness would allow) that her Son was God. After the Annunciation, I would imagine our Holy Mother would have scoured the Law and the Prophets to understand what she was undertaking.…since it was Mary who wanted to get involved not Jesus, I made a leap…
You are correct. But how do you suppose Mary thought that Jesus would resolve the problem? …they were poor (contrary to what some believe a town carpenter did not make a killing in Jesus’ days); Jesus did not seem to be connected (Scriptures speak about Him returning home with His parents and living with them as an obedient Son; this implies that He may have had mad skills with wood, pegs, and adhesives, not wine or people in the industry…); so was Mary simply one of those overly possitive Moms who believe their own exagerated stories about their children’s abilities or did she know that Jesus was God? (Consider St. Luke 1:26-55)
Sadly, too many times we divorce the Holy Spirit from the Holy Scriptures and we read them in the vacuum of man’s intellect.
Maran atha!
Angel
But, I can only assume that she knew that, somehow, her Son would solve the couple’s dilemma.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Yes, I understand that I disagree with… well… nearly all of Old Scholars interpretations… including the thought that Jesus didn’t know that his human soul was fused with his Divinity until the Holy Spirit came down… as if the Holy Spirit and Jesus could ever be separated in the first place.
But I respect and admire his dedication to learning the Scriptures. And, of course (warning… “dig” coming up!), I’d love to see his desire to learn more about the bridegroom equaled by his desire to learn more about the bride!
O
Old_Scholar
Guest
E
eric_sammons
Guest
I really believe Jesus is God and I deny him every day in my actions.
E
eric_sammons
Guest
Old Scholar,
The major problem with your exegesis of Scripture is that you make assumptions on how others should act which really just reveal how you want them to act.
For example, you state that if Jesus knew he was God, he would have started his public ministry when he was 18 or 19. Why? There are many reasons in which Jesus could have been well aware of his divinity at 18 and not started his public ministry until he was 30:
Another example of making false assumptions about how others should act is that you think that the apostles would have acted differently if they had known Jesus was divine. First, that says nothing about Christ’s self-knowledge; it is clear from the Gospels that the apostles were slow to understand the person of Jesus. Yet they clearly did have some idea that Christ was no mere man. Peter’s confession does speak to an idea of divinity: it was not any special thing to call someone a “son of God” yet Jesus tells Peter that God revealed this truth to Peter. If it was just a human understanding that Jesus was God’s special instrument (which is what “son of God” could mean), why did God have to reveal it to Peter? Clearly God was revealing something to Peter that human reason alone could not deduce: that Jesus was divine. Did they understand that reality completely? Of course not, it would take Pentecost for them to really “get it”.
When reading Scripture, it is important not to project our own ideas onto the characters; instead we must understand them as the text presents them. In many occasions in all the Gospels (but especially John’s) Jesus is clearly aware of his divinity throughout his entire public ministry. Just because he doesn’t act as we might think a self-aware God would act says more about our own understanding than it does about Jesus.
The major problem with your exegesis of Scripture is that you make assumptions on how others should act which really just reveal how you want them to act.
For example, you state that if Jesus knew he was God, he would have started his public ministry when he was 18 or 19. Why? There are many reasons in which Jesus could have been well aware of his divinity at 18 and not started his public ministry until he was 30:
- He wanted to show the value of ordinary work. If he had left for his public ministry, the value of his “hidden life” as a carpenter would not have been available for all of us who live such lives. His whole life was redemptive, not just certain actions at the end.
- All the proper people needed to be in place for salvation history to be acted out (Peter, Pilate, John the Baptist, etc.). He was to be born in Bethlehem, but it needed a census for that to happen and that occurred around 4 BC, yet his public ministry had to occur when Pilate was governor, John the apostle was old enough to follow him, etc.
- At 18 or 19, it is unlikely anyone would have taken him seriously as a preacher. God works through our preconceptions and cultural norms, He does not obliterate them.
- By waiting until he was 30, he showed the great value of virginity. If he had died at the age of 21 or so, it could be said that he just didn’t get around to marrying. By waiting until he was 30, he shows that he chose virginity, thus giving it great value.
Another example of making false assumptions about how others should act is that you think that the apostles would have acted differently if they had known Jesus was divine. First, that says nothing about Christ’s self-knowledge; it is clear from the Gospels that the apostles were slow to understand the person of Jesus. Yet they clearly did have some idea that Christ was no mere man. Peter’s confession does speak to an idea of divinity: it was not any special thing to call someone a “son of God” yet Jesus tells Peter that God revealed this truth to Peter. If it was just a human understanding that Jesus was God’s special instrument (which is what “son of God” could mean), why did God have to reveal it to Peter? Clearly God was revealing something to Peter that human reason alone could not deduce: that Jesus was divine. Did they understand that reality completely? Of course not, it would take Pentecost for them to really “get it”.
When reading Scripture, it is important not to project our own ideas onto the characters; instead we must understand them as the text presents them. In many occasions in all the Gospels (but especially John’s) Jesus is clearly aware of his divinity throughout his entire public ministry. Just because he doesn’t act as we might think a self-aware God would act says more about our own understanding than it does about Jesus.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I was under the impression a Jew couldn’t become a Rabbi (a teacher with authority) until 30. I believe this is one of the reasons Jesus waited. Remember, John the Baptist would need to be 30 as well.
O
Old_Scholar
Guest
Very well said. It is very thought-provoking. You may very well be correct in most of what you say.
Reading about the life of Jesus does tell us some things we may not be able to get from Scripture. For example, most scholars believe Jesus spent a great deal of time away from His family during those “lost” years. Many believe Jesus was partially estranged from His family because they were concerned as to why He seemed to spend so much time doing other things than working in the family business. It seems the entire family was engaged in the carpentry business and it was a noble and fairly good occupation at the time but Jesus spent a great deal of time away and most scholars believe he was “doing His Father’s work” in His own way even though we don’t have a record of what He was actually doing. Careful study of Scripture does seem to support the “estranged” situation with His family.
Again, your post is very good and certainly makes one want to think much more about the Life of Jesus.
I have just finished studying my 45th book on the Life of Jesus. It is titled: “The Life and Teaching of Jesus” and the author, also a D.D., is William Neil, lecturer in Biblical Studies at the university of Nottingham. The theme of his book is an authoritative reaffirmation of Jesus as the Messiah, the unique Son of God, in whom the Creator manifested Himself to awaken mankind to righteousness and love.
Because of your thoughts, I would like to quote a quotation from Dr. Neil’s book of Vincent Taylor’s book, The Person of Christ.
“In becoming man, the Son of God willed to renounce the exercise of divine prerogatives and power, so that in the course of His earthly existence, He might live within the necessary limitations which belong to human finitude. Divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence were laid aside, not in the sense that they were abandoned or destroyed, but in such a manner that they became potential or latent because no longer in exercise. The knowledge of His heavenly origin and divine nature was given to Him by revelation and intuition, at His Baptism, Temptation, and Transfiguration, and during seasons of prayer and communion with His Heavenly Father. These experiences were remembered and formed the undertone of His life and ministry, but they were not always so central in His consciousness as to preclude the frustrations, disappointments and trials of a truly human life…Neverless, at all times, in His humiliation as well as in His exaltation, He receives through communion with His Father an impress upon His human consciousness which is the secret of His moral elevation and of His power to do ‘mighty works’…”
Surely Jesus’ human life was nearly as human as most others. It appears His knowledge of “Who He was” grew as He did.
Rabbis have to attend seminary for 5 years and one more year if their knowledge is not very good in Hebrew and other languages. They have to be college graduates and there is probably an internship for them. Therefore a Rabbi would be close to 30 years of age by the time they finished all the requirements but I don’t believe the age is a requirement, just the education.
E
eric_sammons
Guest
Old Scholar,
I just wanted to give you some Scriptural references to support the idea that Jesus was fully aware of his divinity throughout his public ministry. One of the problems is that we moderns look for the biblical authors to speak “our language.” In other words, if Jesus was God, he should just come out and say “I am God,” right? However, this neglects to consider the reality of the world in which Jesus lived. If he had simply made this declaration, the contemporary (i.e. non-Trinitarian) understanding of God would have prevented anyone from accepting that claim. The idea that a person could be God, yet distinct from the Father, and there still be only one God was quite literally inconceivable. But Jesus did make claims that make clear that he understood his own divinity, while remaining distinct from the Father and still adhering to monotheism.
For brevity, I will just take some examples from the Gospel of Matthew. These are not comprehensive, but should give some idea of Christ’s self-understanding.
Chapter 5:
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is fond of saying “You have heard it said…But I say to you”. The examples he gives are from the Mosaic Law, which Jews believed was from God Himself. That Jesus freely alters that Law, and without any authorization other than his own desires, shows that he believes his authority is absolute.
Chapter 8 (and elsewhere):
Jesus performs many healing during his ministry. What is noteworthy is that he does not call on any other power or authority for these healings. Jewish and pagan healers were quite common in the 1st century, but they would all call upon some other authority (God, pagan gods, etc.) to heal. Jesus simply says “Be made clean” or something to that effect. It is his own power that heals - not the power of another. And who did a 1st century Jew believe was the only one with the power over creation to heal? God himself.
Chapter 9
In the healing of the paralytic, Jesus first tells the man that his sins are forgiven. This is blasphemy at its most basic level, for only God can forgive sins. But Jesus does nothing to correct the crowd in their belief that Jesus thinks he has a power only God has.
Chapter 9
When John’s disciples ask Jesus about fasting, Jesus refers to himself as the “bridegroom.” To a 1st century Jew, God himself is the bridegroom of Israel (see Hosea 2 and Isaiah 54 & 62). Yet Jesus takes this title for himself, which is an image that would border on blasphemy.
Chapter 12
In the dispute about picking grain on the Sabbath, Jesus tells the Pharisees that he is “Lord of the Sabbath”. The Sabbath was the center of creation to a Jew, and God was the creator of the Sabbath. Some Jews back then even thought that God Himself was bound to the Sabbath and rested on that day. Yet Jesus calls himself the “Lord of the Sabbath”. This is clearly an indication that Jesus believed he was on the same level as God.
Chapter 16
I have already mentioned the significance of Peter’s confession of faith being a divine revelation in an earlier post.
These are just some examples of Jesus’ self-understanding of his divinity. But they are easy to miss if one does not understand the context in which they are presented. Nonetheless, they are clear indicators that Jesus knew he was divine throughout his entire public ministry.
I just wanted to give you some Scriptural references to support the idea that Jesus was fully aware of his divinity throughout his public ministry. One of the problems is that we moderns look for the biblical authors to speak “our language.” In other words, if Jesus was God, he should just come out and say “I am God,” right? However, this neglects to consider the reality of the world in which Jesus lived. If he had simply made this declaration, the contemporary (i.e. non-Trinitarian) understanding of God would have prevented anyone from accepting that claim. The idea that a person could be God, yet distinct from the Father, and there still be only one God was quite literally inconceivable. But Jesus did make claims that make clear that he understood his own divinity, while remaining distinct from the Father and still adhering to monotheism.
For brevity, I will just take some examples from the Gospel of Matthew. These are not comprehensive, but should give some idea of Christ’s self-understanding.
Chapter 5:
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is fond of saying “You have heard it said…But I say to you”. The examples he gives are from the Mosaic Law, which Jews believed was from God Himself. That Jesus freely alters that Law, and without any authorization other than his own desires, shows that he believes his authority is absolute.
Chapter 8 (and elsewhere):
Jesus performs many healing during his ministry. What is noteworthy is that he does not call on any other power or authority for these healings. Jewish and pagan healers were quite common in the 1st century, but they would all call upon some other authority (God, pagan gods, etc.) to heal. Jesus simply says “Be made clean” or something to that effect. It is his own power that heals - not the power of another. And who did a 1st century Jew believe was the only one with the power over creation to heal? God himself.
Chapter 9
In the healing of the paralytic, Jesus first tells the man that his sins are forgiven. This is blasphemy at its most basic level, for only God can forgive sins. But Jesus does nothing to correct the crowd in their belief that Jesus thinks he has a power only God has.
Chapter 9
When John’s disciples ask Jesus about fasting, Jesus refers to himself as the “bridegroom.” To a 1st century Jew, God himself is the bridegroom of Israel (see Hosea 2 and Isaiah 54 & 62). Yet Jesus takes this title for himself, which is an image that would border on blasphemy.
Chapter 12
In the dispute about picking grain on the Sabbath, Jesus tells the Pharisees that he is “Lord of the Sabbath”. The Sabbath was the center of creation to a Jew, and God was the creator of the Sabbath. Some Jews back then even thought that God Himself was bound to the Sabbath and rested on that day. Yet Jesus calls himself the “Lord of the Sabbath”. This is clearly an indication that Jesus believed he was on the same level as God.
Chapter 16
I have already mentioned the significance of Peter’s confession of faith being a divine revelation in an earlier post.
These are just some examples of Jesus’ self-understanding of his divinity. But they are easy to miss if one does not understand the context in which they are presented. Nonetheless, they are clear indicators that Jesus knew he was divine throughout his entire public ministry.
O
Old_Scholar
Guest
This fits in pretty well with what I have been saying. It was about the time Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist that He began His public ministry. I still believe that is when He fully realized Who He was. I believe this happened very early and all that you relate here was after this event.
E
eric_sammons
Guest
Old Scholar,
You said,
But your speculation that Jesus became fully self-aware at his baptism has no basis in Scripture. We have very few texts in the Scriptures that gives us any inkling to Christ’s thoughts before the Baptism, but the ones we do have do not support the idea that Jesus became self-aware of his divinity at his baptism.
One is Luke’s account of the finding in the temple. In that account, he calls the Temple “My Father’s House”. From this phrase alone, one cannot say definitively that Jesus was aware of his divinity at that age, but one cannot say the opposite either. If anything, it leans in the direction of self-awareness.
In Matthew’s Gospel, John hesitates to baptize Jesus, as he senses that he doesn’t need it. Jesus doesn’t proclaim that he is repenting, which assumes he knew he was sinless. This is not a proof that he was self-aware of his divinity, but he clearly knew - before his baptism- that he was not an ordinary man.
But in John’s prelude we read that Jesus pre-existed all things and was God. So even if Jesus was not self-aware of his divinity, he was, according to the Scriptures, divine from the moment of his conception (and before). So the question becomes: why would a 20 or 25-year-old Jesus, with full human capabilities, NOT known he was divine if in fact he was? Christian tradition has contemplated this for centuries and has been virtually unanimous that Jesus would have be aware of his divinity as an adult, even before his baptism. One thing is for certain, though, nothing in Scripture would support the idea that Jesus was not aware of his divinity until his baptism.
You said,
Why then did you say this earlier (from your post of Jan 13, '09, 7:18 pm)?
I was under the impression - from your own words - that you didn’t believe he knew fully of his divinity until the resurrection.
But your speculation that Jesus became fully self-aware at his baptism has no basis in Scripture. We have very few texts in the Scriptures that gives us any inkling to Christ’s thoughts before the Baptism, but the ones we do have do not support the idea that Jesus became self-aware of his divinity at his baptism.
One is Luke’s account of the finding in the temple. In that account, he calls the Temple “My Father’s House”. From this phrase alone, one cannot say definitively that Jesus was aware of his divinity at that age, but one cannot say the opposite either. If anything, it leans in the direction of self-awareness.
In Matthew’s Gospel, John hesitates to baptize Jesus, as he senses that he doesn’t need it. Jesus doesn’t proclaim that he is repenting, which assumes he knew he was sinless. This is not a proof that he was self-aware of his divinity, but he clearly knew - before his baptism- that he was not an ordinary man.
But in John’s prelude we read that Jesus pre-existed all things and was God. So even if Jesus was not self-aware of his divinity, he was, according to the Scriptures, divine from the moment of his conception (and before). So the question becomes: why would a 20 or 25-year-old Jesus, with full human capabilities, NOT known he was divine if in fact he was? Christian tradition has contemplated this for centuries and has been virtually unanimous that Jesus would have be aware of his divinity as an adult, even before his baptism. One thing is for certain, though, nothing in Scripture would support the idea that Jesus was not aware of his divinity until his baptism.
S
SeanTom
Guest
Jesus probably knew of His divinity; but he may not have known the FULL power of His divinity until His resurrection.
But hey, knowing whether Jesus did or did not know of his full power at a given time should not be of great concern for us and should not, I believe, take up so much time and space on this forum. I’ve been reading all of the postings on this subject and I’m getting dizzy - it’s like traveling on a merry-go-round. Interesting postings though…
But hey, knowing whether Jesus did or did not know of his full power at a given time should not be of great concern for us and should not, I believe, take up so much time and space on this forum. I’ve been reading all of the postings on this subject and I’m getting dizzy - it’s like traveling on a merry-go-round. Interesting postings though…
A
AmbroseSJ
Guest
It’s a very good topic really. There is MUCH blathering talk today about how Jesus gradually became enlightened about his mission, and his nature. It tends very much to downplay the divinity of Jesus, and the hypostatic union.
I think Eric is doing a wonderful job, using only Scripture, to refute this error.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Actually, another translation of “My Father’s House” is “Didn’t you know I’d be about My Father’s Business”. Here’s what Edward Sri has to say about it in “The Rosary in Scripture”
This would (at least) imply that Jesus knew His mission that His Heavenly Father had given Him.
O
Old_Scholar
Guest
I still believe that Christ became fully aware that He was special, probably that He was the Messiah, at the Baptism, but not that He was God. I still believe He became fully aware of that after the resurrection. Perhaps I didn’t explain that as completely as I could have. He said and acted as if He was the “Son of God” but then we are all considered “Sons of God” at salvation.
Would Jesus have asked His Father to “remove this cup from me,” had He known He was God? (Mark 14:36) And on the cross He “gave His spirit to the Father.” I still believe that it was after the resurrection that He was fully aware that He was God because He was “transformed” into His spirit body and no longer human in presence.
At the baptism, Christ came aware that He was the Messiah. All Jews expected the Messiah but did they expect God?
That’s the problem. We have very little information about Jesus until His baptism. This was very early in His public ministry. Wouldn’t it be great if we had been given more information about His early years?
- Status