- Jan 26, 2016
If Jesus was (I believe He was) God in the flesh, why was He not omniscient? Ex the fig tree.
'But we see Jesus,
It's all about legalities. Adam was the ruler, he sinned, and the authority went to Satan. Satan could only, legally, be defeated by a sinless man. No human man could legally take back what Adam forfeited. God became a man, lived as a man, died as a man, rose from the dead as God. Because Jesus was sinless, and Satan had no legal right to kill Him, Satan lost his authority when he killed Jesus. If Jesus had used His right as God, knew all God knows, He would never had legally taken back the Authority He first gave Adam. He had to live as a man, never once using His Godliness. He learned obedience and He obeyed, paving the path for us to follow.
Thanks you for your reply. You have quoted scripture and of course I agree but I can not see where you have addressed the issue. Could you clarify please.'But we see Jesus,
Who was made a little lower than the angels
for the suffering of death,
crowned with glory and honour;
that He by the grace of God
should taste death for every man. '
'Let this mind be in you,
which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who, being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
But made Himself of no reputation,
and took upon Him the form of a servant,
and was made in the likeness of men
And being found in fashion as a man,
He humbled Himself,
and became obedient unto death,
even the death of the cross.
Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him,
and given Him a name which is above every name:'
'I have glorified Thee on the earth:
I have finished the work
which Thou gavest Me to do.
And now, O Father,
glorify Thou Me
with Thine Own Self
with the glory which I had with Thee
before the world was.'
I am assuming that you are referring to Matthew 24:36 since that is a fairly standard objection to Jesus having omniscience.
No Pete (@Seedsower), I cannot.Thanks you for your reply. You have quoted scripture and of course I agree but I can not see where you have addressed the issue. Could you clarify please.
Heb 2:9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
I would also add that Jesus HAD to take flesh in order to die. As God, He was unable to die.Hi @Seedsower,
Good question there, bro. Now my thoughts are from this scripture -
`Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh & blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.` (Heb. 2: 14)
Thus I understand that the Lord when manifest in human form had the divine nature/character, but He lay aside His Omni powers. This He did so as He had to learn obedience, by listening to the Holy Spirit just as we have to do. Jesus overcame the devil without the use of His Omni powers, but as a human.
First of all I would like to thank you all for taking the time to reply.I would also add that Jesus HAD to take flesh in order to die. As God, He was unable to die.
The "power of death" which the devil possesses is not physical death. The death in view in Scripture is the kind of death Jesus died, and that was in answer to "the wages of sin", the penal infliction of the law, suffering the wrath of a Holy God.
Satan wielded that death. He stood upon and still does, the justice of God and the inflexibility of His Law upon the true nature of our sins. BUT, when Christ died in our place, when He was made sin and a curse for us----then all the power of Satan was gone!!!!
So now, what can Satan say??? Jesus endured the penalty for the broken law, and now, since the law is vindicated, sin put away, death swallowed up, Christ Jesus has stripped the devil of his power and wrested from his hands his most awful weapon--DEATH!
Through death, Jesus destroyed him who held sway in the realm of death. Jesus rendered Satan powerless and stripped him of his rule. It was Jesus in a body of flesh that personally attacked Satan. He won that battle and took from Satan the keys of death and hell. Because of all that, we as Christians today no longer fear death!!!!
"I AM He that liveth and was dead; and behold, I AM alive for evermore, AMENP: and have the keys of hell and of death".
"Wherefore when He cometh into the world, he saith, sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me".
Somebody should be shouting AMEN about right now!
That is correct Pete.First of all I would like to thank you all for taking the time to reply.
Here's what I believe scripture teaches on the matter. Jesus is fully God, of that there is no doubt and as such He is omniscient. However, He also had two natures, one fully human the other fully Divine. These two natures held in what scholars call hypostatic union. Jesus as fully man didn't know certain things but as fully God knew all things such as the hearts of all men. There is also the kenosis heresy ie the false teaching that says when Jesus became man (derived from Phil Ch 2) He laid aside certain aspects of His Divinity. That is heresy, when God became man He remained fully Divine as well as becoming fully human. If any part of Christ was not fully Divine and human then His sacrificial death would have been meaningless. Praise God that was not the case, The Father accepted His sacrifice and raised Him from the dead on the third day!
Agreed! The term itself isn't necessarily negative. It wasn’t until the second century that Christians began using the term in a more negative sense to refer to a “school of thought” that needed to be rejected for some reason.Hello @Seedsower,
I had not heard of a 'kenosis heresy' before, and I am so glad I had not.
Who determines what is heresy and what is not?
Surely it is by bringing the whole testimony of Scripture to bear upon what is being said that determines if it is heresy. Comparing Scripture with Scripture, and not comparing one man's interpretation with another.
In Christ Jesus
The argument comes from the comment that Jesus made when He said ONLY the Father knows the time of His coming. If He were omniscient, they say He would have known also.
And I agree with you completely.'... But
of that day and hour
knoweth ('intuitively'- Gr.oida) no man,
no, not even the angels of heaven,
but My Father only.
But as the days of Noe were,
so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.'
Thank you @Major,
The word translated 'knoweth' (above), refers to intuitive knowledge. The same word is used in verses 42 & 43 (know), whereas in verses 32, 33, 39, 43 (known), it is a different form of knowing.(Bible Margin)
Our Lord said that neither man nor angel can know 'intuitively' when the Son of Man shall come, only the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ can know in that way (without being told).
Our Lord only ever spoke the words given to Him by the Father, so this is what He said. Is is no indication that He Himself was not aware, that He Himself did not know, simply that this is what the Father would have Him say.
His knowing is not at issue here, man's inability to know without being told is, and angelic inability to know without being told also, but not His own knowledge or lack of it. He is merely His Father's mouthpiece .
That is how I see it anyway.
In Christ Jesus
The normal test of heresy is that if a teaching departs from the plain and orthodox teaching of the body of scripture then that teaching is heresy. The fig tree is used by those who deny the full deity of our Lord. They maintain that Jesus would have known the tree had no fruit without approaching it, completely missing the main reason. Thanks for your reply.
Jesus lived life as His Father lived in heaven, His love for us, to teach us. He came to fulfill the Word, be the Word. Of course He knew of the fig tree. He did what he did to teach us . . . Love you Jesus so much!The normal test of heresy is that if a teaching departs from the plain and orthodox teaching of the body of scripture then that teaching is heresy. The fig tree is used by those who deny the full deity of our Lord. They maintain that Jesus would have known the tree had no fruit without approaching it, completely missing the main reason. Thanks for your reply.