Was Jesus omniscient?

Status
Not open for further replies.

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
That's not very nice of you to imply I am a troll!
I am stating what I believe to be historical fact and am looking forward to a discussion on the issue. I am interested to read what you believe.

Insight into my worldview: You are more judged by your post count, time here, and awareness of the rules than by anything you say.

Say something controversial or post in a forum you are not allowed to within your first hundred posts, and I'm going to assume you are a troll. It's not personal, but you are right that it isn't nice.

I don't mind having this discussion with you, but we can't have it here. We can't have it in the Theology forum, because you are not allowed.

So, let's have this chat where you are allowed. How's that sound?

(Reply by PMing me...)
 
Upvote 0

Deaver

A follower of Christ
May 25, 2011
485
22
Colorado, USA
Visit site
✟15,732.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm just curious because Jesus learns and finds things out in the Gospels, which doesn't seem like a conditional possibility for an omniscient.

It is easy to oversimplify scripture. What generally happens, then, is one misses the true meaning of the passage, creating conflict with other passages on the same subject.

Keep in mind that one passage cannot be interpreted or applied in such a way so as to contradict the meaning of any other passage.

One list of what the Bible tells us Jesus knew could include he following

1. At the age of 12, Jesus was aware of His special and unique relationship with the Father (Luke. 2:49). He referred to God as “MY FATHER.” (This is quite significant seeing that, in John 5:17-18, the Jews attempted to kill Jesus for using this kind of personal language to describe His relationship with the Father.)

2. Jesus was able to know a person's character before He had ever spoken with, or even met him (John 1:47).

3. Jesus knew the thoughts of others before those thoughts were uttered (Mark 2:8).

4. Jesus knew the attitudes of others before those attitudes were openly manifested (Mark 3:1-5).

5. Jesus "knew all men" and "knew what was in man" (John 2:24-25).

6. Jesus knew "where He came from, and where he was going" (John 8:14).

7. Jesus "knew from the beginning, who would not believe on Him and who would betray Him" (John 6:64).

8. Jesus knew that the Father had "given all things into His hands, and that He had come from God, and was going back to God"(John 13:3).

9. Jesus "knew all things that would come upon Him" from His arrest and forward (John 18:4).

10. Quite simply, the apostles twice stated that Jesus "knew all things" (John 16:30; 21:17).

Any passage that appears to teach that He did must be carefully considered and must be ultimately interpreted in a way that harmonizes with the rest of scripture.

Therefore, I submit that during the time that Jesus was on earth as a man, He remained omniscient God.
 
Upvote 0

Deaver

A follower of Christ
May 25, 2011
485
22
Colorado, USA
Visit site
✟15,732.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No.

Phillipians says he 'emptied himself.'

Some food for thought:

From the KJV, Philippians 2:7, “But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:”

The literal translation is: “But He emptied Himself.” It is from the ancient Greek word emptied (kenosis) that we get the idea that Jesus’ incarnation was essentially a self-emptying. The question immediately arises, “Of what did the Lord Jesus empty Himself?”

Jesus did not cease being God while on earth. Rather, in addition to being God, He also became man. His incarnation was not the subtraction of deity, but the addition of humanity. Several things in this text support this position. First, it does not say Christ gave up or emptied Himself of His deity, but merely of His rights as deity, assuming the “form of a servant” (v. 7 ) so as to be an example for us (v. 5 ). Second, the text declares that He was in the “form of God” or “in very nature God” (v. 6 , NIV ). Just as the “form of a servant” (v. 7 ) is a servant by nature, so the “form of God” (v. 6 ) is God by nature. Third, this very passage declares that every knee will one day confess Jesus is “Lord,” a citation from Isaiah 45:23 that refers to Yahweh, a name used exclusively of God. (copied from ‘When Critics Ask’)

It seems that you have adopted the kenotic theory of the incarnation to the point where you say that Jesus divested Himself of many of the attributes of deity - such as omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, and even suffered the elimination of His own divine self-consciousness. Yet Jesus did not (and could not) become “less God” in the incarnation. No deity was subtracted (though he did renounce some of the rights of deity); rather humanity was added to His nature.
 
Upvote 0

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
It is easy to oversimplify scripture.

Therefore, I submit that during the time that Jesus was on earth as a man, He remained omniscient God.

Wow. It sounds like you really know your stuff. I really respect that.

Food for thought:
There is one thing Jesus did not know.
It only takes not knowing one thing to not know everything.
Jesus admits, without ambiguity, that He did not know that one thing.
Thus, I submit, that He identified Himself as not omniscient.

This is a really interesting point because there is, in terms of perfection, infinite space between 100% and 99.99%.

In this case, Jesus is, admittedly, less than 100% omniscient. - Matt. 24:36
 
Upvote 0

Deaver

A follower of Christ
May 25, 2011
485
22
Colorado, USA
Visit site
✟15,732.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Wow. It sounds like you really know your stuff. I really respect that.

Food for thought:
There is one thing Jesus did not know.
It only takes not knowing one thing to not know everything.
Jesus admits, without ambiguity, that He did not know that one thing.
Thus, I submit, that He identified Himself as not omniscient.

This is a really interesting point because there is, in terms of perfection, infinite space between 100% and 99.99%.

In this case, Jesus is, admittedly, less than 100% omniscient. - Matt. 24:36

I do not agree with your assertion. My point was, "If you agree that Jesus is God then you understand that Jesus did not (and could not) become “less God” in the incarnation. No deity was subtracted (though he did renounce some of the rights of deity); rather humanity was added to His nature."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Deaver

A follower of Christ
May 25, 2011
485
22
Colorado, USA
Visit site
✟15,732.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
How is that 'emptying' in any sense of the word?

Steve, I think the key idea, here, is that of bringing to emptiness, vanity, or nothingness; and, consequently, it is applied, here, to a case where Jesus lays aside his rank and dignity, and becomes in respect to that as nothing; that is, he assumes a more humble rank and station.

Further, I submit for your consideration:

It cannot mean that he literally divested himself of his divine nature and perfections. He is God; He could not cease to be omnipotent, and omnipresent, and most holy, and true, and good.

It is conceivable, I suppose, that he might have laid aside, for a time, the symbols or the manifestation of his glory, or that the outward expressions of his majesty in heaven might have been withdrawn.


Even then, that supposes no change in the divine nature, or in the essential glory of His divine perfections. For example, when the sun is obscured by a cloud, or in an eclipse, there is no real change of its glory, nor are its beams extinguished, nor is it changed in any sense. Its luster is only obscured for a time. So it might have been in regard to any manifestation of the glory of the Son of God.

Of course there is much in regard to this which is obscure, but the language of the apostle undoubtedly implies more than that Jesus took a humble place, or that he demeaned himself in an humble manner. In regard to the actual change respecting his manifestations in heaven, or the withdrawing of the symbols of his glory there, the Scriptures are nearly silent, and conjecture is useless - perhaps improper (no disrespect meant to anyone).


The language in Philippians 2:7, I think fairly implies that he laid aside that which was expressive of his being divine - that glory which is involved in the phrase “being in the form of God” - and took upon himself another form and manifestation in the condition of a servant.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
I do not agree with your assertion. My point was, "If you agree that Jesus is God then you understand that Jesus did not (and could not) become “less God” in the incarnation. No deity was subtracted (though he did renounce some of the rights of deity); rather humanity was added to His nature."

I do not agree with your assertion. My point is that the text explicitly says He was not omnipotent.

I do not deny that Jesus is and was God.
I do not deny that the Bible describes God as omnipotent.
I also do not deny that the Bible describes Jesus as not knowing something, and thus not omniscient.

Is it not possible that Jesus could be God while having less than all of the qualities of God?
 
Upvote 0

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Steve, I think the key idea, here, is that of bringing to emptiness, vanity, or nothingness; and, consequently, it is applied, here, to a case where Jesus lays aside his rank and dignity, and becomes in respect to that as nothing; that is, he assumes a more humble rank and station.

I would agree that is all it meant if it did not specifically describe Him as not knowing something.

It cannot mean that he literally divested himself of his divine nature and perfections. He is God; He could not cease to be omnipotent, and omnipresent, and most holy, and true, and good.

Why coudn't He "cease to be omnipotent, and omnipresent, and most holy, and true, and good" while still maintaining His divine nature and perfections?

It is conceivable, I suppose, that he might have laid aside, for a time, the symbols or the manifestation of his glory, or that the outward expressions of his majesty in heaven might have been withdrawn.

I don't know what this means to you, to be honest.

Even then, that supposes no change in the divine nature, or in the essential glory of His divine perfections. For example, when the sun is obscured by a cloud, or in an eclipse, there is no real change of its glory, nor are its beams extinguished, nor is it changed in any sense. Its luster is only obscured for a time. So it might have been in regard to any manifestation of the glory of the Son of God.

Jesus is the Son of God whether He is on the earth in human form, or at the Father's right hand in the throne room of glory, is He not?

Well, He says very explicitly that the Son of God does not know... He does not say anything about clouds obscuring HIs view of that which He once knew and will know again soon.

Of course there is much in regard to this which is obscure, but the language of the apostle undoubtedly implies more than that Jesus took a humble place, or that he demeaned himself in an humble manner. In regard to the actual change respecting his manifestations in heaven, or the withdrawing of the symbols of his glory there, the Scriptures are nearly silent, and conjecture is useless - perhaps improper (no disrespect meant to anyone).

It is not conjecture that Jesus did not know something. The Scripture is not silent about that. It is explicitly in the text.

The language in Philippians 2:7, I think fairly implies that he laid aside that which was expressive of his being divine - that glory which is involved in the phrase “being in the form of God” - and took upon himself another form and manifestation in the condition of a servant.

Was He or was He not omniscient in that "form and manifestation in the condition of a servant?"
 
Upvote 0

Goinheix

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2010
1,617
31
Montevideo Uruguay
✟2,018.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
How many things did Jesus not know? And how many things can a god not know before we call it not-omnicsient?
Jesus did not know of the arrest of John
Jesus did not know of the dead of John
Jesus did not know the dead of Lazarus
Jesus did not know the place of Lazarus sepulcrde
Jesus did not know what was briught to him to drink at the cross.
Jesusn did not know who was the woman who touches him.
And the list goes on.
 
Upvote 0

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Why appeal to infered ignorance when an explicit example is available?
There is one thing Jesus admitted outright of not knowing: the time of His own return.
It only takes not knowing one thing to make someone not omniscient.
But, you are right in acknowledging that there were other things He appeared not to know, too.
 
Upvote 0

RipleyCountyChristian

The guy Chuck Norris tries to live up to :)
Nov 25, 2007
6,541
1,356
30
Oklahoma City, USA
Visit site
✟20,237.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
My view on this is that Jesus could have come down with all the divine attributes of God the Father, but he laid aside all of those powers of God, and lived as man. It was his choice, and he chose to become man, to live as us among us, and to show us way.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Goinheix

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2010
1,617
31
Montevideo Uruguay
✟2,018.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Why appeal to infered ignorance when an explicit example is available?
There is one thing Jesus admitted outright of not knowing: the time of His own return.
It only takes not knowing one thing to make someone not omniscient.
But, you are right in acknowledging that there were other things He appeared not to know, too.

I dont get it right. Are you saying that Jesus actually were not omniscient at all? Is that what you are admiting?
 
Upvote 0

Goinheix

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2010
1,617
31
Montevideo Uruguay
✟2,018.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
My view on this is that Jesus could have come down with all the divine attributes of God the Father, but he laid aside all of those powers of God, and lived as man. It was his choice, and he chose to become man, to live as us among us, and to show us way.

Correct. God the Son choose to emtiyed out of all his divine atributes, and birth as a man with not any power or hability proper of God.
 
Upvote 0

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
I dont get it right. Are you saying that Jesus actually were not omniscient at all? Is that what you are admiting?

I'm missing the point of this question. Omniscient is a state of knowing everything. It is, by definition, an absolute. So, when you ask me whether Jesus was not omniscient at all, I get the impression you are suggesting that He might be partially omniscient. But, that doesn't make sense to me because someone cannot, by definition, be partially absolutely something. He is either partially something, or absolutely something. He either knew partially, or He knew absolutely. Perhaps you could further explain the assumption behind your question...
 
Upvote 0

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.
Jun 11, 2010
3,171
403
✟20,090.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
My view on this is that Jesus could have come down with all the divine attributes of God the Father, but he laid aside all of those powers of God, and lived as man. It was his choice, and he chose to become man, to live as us among us, and to show us way.

Great. Was omniscience one of those divine attributes? That's all this thread is asking.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.