How would you respond to this argument regarding Christ's human ignorance?

Bob Carabbio

Well-known member
So, I was just thinking about Luke 2:52, "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man", which of course means he did so in his human nature with his human mind, not with his divine nature. But I was also thinking about some liberal theologians that I had seen argue that Jesus was wrong about the six days of Creation, for example, which led me to consider this possible argument. My question is, how do we respond to the argument that Jesus could have been wrong and incorrect about some things in his human nature? Certainly after his resurrection, he knew all things (John 21:17) and all authority had been given to him (Matthew 28:18), but I'm unsure what verses I'd go to or what argument I'd make to show that while he didn't know everything in his humiliation, what he did know, he couldn't be wrong about. Or is that even the right way to think about it, or is it rather possible that he could've been wrong about things, but nothing that the Scriptures touch (for example, could he have done a math problem incorrectly?)

Any thoughts, or any resources that try to address this?
Probably not to your satisfaction. What has become known, though, is that Jesus WALKED as a fully Human MAN (not "God Almighty" hiding in a man suit pretending to be Human). Jesus apparently had to ACCEPT Who He was by Faith (just like WE have to accept our Salvation by FAITH), and after being joined by the Holy Spirit after His repentance at John's Baptism (not of any SIN, but of his existing lifestyle - Carpenter maybe, Head of Mary's household) He walked immediately into REAL TEMPTATION in the wilderness (not "window dressing"), and having Aced the SAME temptations that Adam and Eve fell to, walked off into His short physical Ministry, and became the perfect SIN OFFERING by which we are cleansed.
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
There is a beauty of insight by finally coming to understand that the Lord God is capable of suspending His rightful abilities of Deity, and take on the nature of an absolute righteous man in his soul.

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE LORD CAN SWITCH TO ONLY HIS HUMANITY, FINALLY EXPLAINS HOW ALL MEN AND ANGELS COULD BE CREATED THROUGH HIM AND KEEP THEIR FREE WILL INTACT WHILE BEING CREATED!!!

In that state of making himself to be functional as the perfect soul of God - without omniscience being operational in his thinking -
IT AVOIDED God's omniscience interfering with the volitions of those being created!

The Incarnation revealed that He can choose to dissociate his soul from the omniscience of His Deity while creating all angels and humans by means utilizing only absolute righteousness in love, wanting for them to only know the glories of God to the fullest!

All Things created for that reason were created THROUGH Him! The Trinity did the work... but was determined by the Soul of God that we saw manifested in Jesus as a man!

Grace and Peace!
 

Our Lord's God

Well-known member
You do not understand anything properly about the hypostatic union of the Son of God.

If you do understand what the concept is? Then you wish to play the devil's advocate.

We are not concerned with those who have no capacity for grasping the truth. Yet, you keep insisting.

At best, you are being religious. Or, just a curiosity seeker with a religious facade.

Spiritual? You are not. Psychic? Maybe. That is a soulish sensitivity, not spirit. Inspirations comes from elsewhere.

You can not comprehend what requires God's enabling power of grace.

Human logic alone is lost to certain truths, and God wants it that way.

But, your the kind that might spend years in places like here challenging Christians to explain what you can never receive.

You must be born again. Not simply religious.

WHO was dead?
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
WHO was dead?
The physical body is what died, yet the identity that was identified with it also died with it. Adam chose to identify with his body rather than God who he was created to reflect. God points out that first case of identity politics will result in the death of those who choose to identify with their flesh rather than their spirit which Christ commends back to God as his body dies.

Christ knows the truth, yet must pay the price for humanity's confusion which entails him remaining identified with the body until it dies. Even so, he points out the reality which is that the life that animates the body continues to live even though the body has died.

The body is is not who Christ is. It is the temple in which Christ dwells, and Christ's spirit dwells within everyone who is alive.
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
The physical body is what died, yet the identity that was identified with it also died with it. Adam chose to identify with his body rather than God who he was created to reflect. God points out that first case of identity politics will result in the death of those who choose to identify with their flesh rather than their spirit which Christ commends back to God as his body dies.

Christ knows the truth, yet must pay the price for humanity's confusion which entails him remaining identified with the body until it dies. Even so, he points out the reality which is that the life that animates the body continues to live even though the body has died.

The body is is not who Christ is. It is the temple in which Christ dwells, and Christ's spirit dwells within everyone who is alive.
Jesus had already died the required death that paid for our sins BEFORE he died physically.

The atonement for mankind's sins was "finished" before he breathed his last (voluntarily) to die physically.


Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled,
Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge
on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. When he had received the drink, Jesus said,
“It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." John 19:28-30​


The atonement was finished as we read that passage. He had not yet died physically. Its important that we see this truth because we will not understand the meaning of the atonement until we do. On the Cross Jesus had died the kind of death that animal sacrifices were only able to symbolize. Jesus did not die as an animal would. The life of the animal is in their blood. But the life of a man is in his soul... When our sins pierced his human perfection, Jesus experienced an agonizing 'spiritual death."


About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). Matthew 27:46​


He had become "dead to the Father's fellowship! He was completely alone and forsaken. An agonizing death for Jesus to experience because our sin cut Him off from the most important love in His life. He was cut off from his Father! A death that he did not warrant, because He always remained faithful to the Father's plan. Our penalty for sin Jesus bore on his body while hanging on the Cross! The spiritual death of Christ. Atonement was "complete - Finished! Before he died physically!

grace and peace......
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Jesus had already died the required death that paid for our sins BEFORE he died physically.

The atonement for mankind's sins was "finished" before he breathed his last (voluntarily) to die physically.


Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled,
Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge
on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. When he had received the drink, Jesus said,
“It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." John 19:28-30​


The atonement was finished as we read that passage. He had not yet died physically. Its important that we see this truth because we will not understand the meaning of the atonement until we do. On the Cross Jesus had died the kind of death that animal sacrifices were only able to symbolize. Jesus did not die as an animal would. The life of the animal is in their blood. But the life of a man is in his soul... When our sins pierced his human perfection, Jesus experienced an agonizing 'spiritual death."


About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). Matthew 27:46​


He had become "dead to the Father's fellowship! He was completely alone and forsaken. An agonizing death for Jesus to experience because our sin cut Him off from the most important love in His life. He was cut off from his Father! A death that he did not warrant, because He always remained faithful to the Father's plan. Our penalty for sin Jesus bore on his body while hanging on the Cross! The spiritual death of Christ. Atonement was "complete - Finished! Before he died physically!

grace and peace......
The agony in the garden is also where many would say that he first began to feel the father pulling away from him. Up until that point, he had no problem slipping through crowds who wanted to kill him. He could overturn the money changer's tables, and slip out without a scratch. It wasn't his time because he always kept his eyes on the father. When he suddenly sees that he can no longer see the father, he knows his time has come, and he must suffer what only the damned can experience; complete separation from God. Yet, he's still alive. This is pure hell. To remain alive and separated from God is pure torment to one's spirit. A dead spirit cannot feel that to begin with. Those who are spiritually dead are oblivious.
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
The agony in the garden is also where many would say that he first began to feel the father pulling away from him.
They can say whatever they want. Believers do that all the time when "sharing."

But, the Word indicates that Jesus was not forsaken until the third hour when darkness covered the Cross. In the Garden Jesus was in agony, yes. Because, He was foreseeing some of what horror he was about to endure. He was in full contact with the Father in the Garden, not forsaken. Not my will Father, but your will be done." = not yet forsaken.

Note! When He was being forsaken, He could no longer call God by, "Father." He could only resort to the generic term "God." He was screaming out (many times) "My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me?"

After the last sin was paid for? And, He saw that all was now completed? He once more used the name "Father." And, no more using the generic term, "my God." "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
They can say whatever they want. Believers do that all the time when "sharing."

But, the Word indicates that Jesus was not forsaken until the third hour when darkness covered the Cross.
How much more forsaken can one get when they ask God that his wrath pass by, and know that it can't? He's fully aware of God's wrath upon him. That's not just separation, that's the unadulterated torment of hell.
In the Garden Jesus was in agony, yes. Because, He was foreseeing some of what horror he was about to endure.
He's under God's wrath. That's explicitly what the text says. It doesn't say he suddenly foresaw what was going to happen. He already pointed all of that out long before this happened. He had pointed out that he must suffer and die long before he made his way to Jerusalem. In fact, it was as soon as he saw the the gospel message had been rejected. It was obvious what was going to happen. At no time prior to that does he ever ask God to remove that cup of wrath from him because he is directly connected to God. It is only when he experiences separation from God that he can truly appreciate what that really means, and that clearly happens in the garden. It's the first time in his life when he kneels down to pray, and realizes that God is gone. It's the first time in his life that he becomes aware of the absence of God's presence. That's what it means to be God forsaken, and fully aware of it.
He was in full contact with the Father in the Garden, not forsaken.
I disagree, and the text indicates he has clearly been forsaken by God at that point. Moreover, he's aware of this existential fact himself.
Not my will Father, but your will be done." = not yet forsaken.
He's documenting that he is already forsaken. What you're saying is that Jesus could have overridden God's will, but that's a self refuting claim. No one can override the sovereign will of God. He could have run and gotten away, but he would still have been under God's wrath and forsaken. Christ points out that those who don't believe are already damned. There is no difference between being damned and forsaken.
Note! When He was being forsaken, He could no longer call God by, "Father." He could only resort to the generic term "God."
He was quoting the inspired word of God. He was documenting the fulfillment of prophecy.
He was screaming out (many times) "My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me?"

After the last sin was paid for? And, He saw that all was now completed? He once more used the name "Father." And, no more using the generic term, "my God." "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."
If I'm following your argument, you're now saying that when he said those last words, he was no longer forsaken?
 

UncleAbee

Active member
So, I was just thinking about Luke 2:52, "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man", which of course means he did so in his human nature with his human mind, not with his divine nature. But I was also thinking about some liberal theologians that I had seen argue that Jesus was wrong about the six days of Creation, for example, which led me to consider this possible argument. My question is, how do we respond to the argument that Jesus could have been wrong and incorrect about some things in his human nature? Certainly after his resurrection, he knew all things (John 21:17) and all authority had been given to him (Matthew 28:18), but I'm unsure what verses I'd go to or what argument I'd make to show that while he didn't know everything in his humiliation, what he did know, he couldn't be wrong about. Or is that even the right way to think about it, or is it rather possible that he could've been wrong about things, but nothing that the Scriptures touch (for example, could he have done a math problem incorrectly?)

Any thoughts, or any resources that try to address this?
The nature of Jesus. The early church spent 4 centuries (at least) debating this. I see you are quoting Luke, John, and Matthew. We assume that they all agreed on what Jesus' divinity means but the question is did they really? The answer to this just may answer your questions. What does Jesus being God mean? This is what the early church debated for centuries.
 

Ignatius

Active member
So, I was just thinking about Luke 2:52, "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man", which of course means he did so in his human nature with his human mind, not with his divine nature. But I was also thinking about some liberal theologians that I had seen argue that Jesus was wrong about the six days of Creation, for example, which led me to consider this possible argument. My question is, how do we respond to the argument that Jesus could have been wrong and incorrect about some things in his human nature? Certainly after his resurrection, he knew all things (John 21:17) and all authority had been given to him (Matthew 28:18), but I'm unsure what verses I'd go to or what argument I'd make to show that while he didn't know everything in his humiliation, what he did know, he couldn't be wrong about. Or is that even the right way to think about it, or is it rather possible that he could've been wrong about things, but nothing that the Scriptures touch (for example, could he have done a math problem incorrectly?)

Any thoughts, or any resources that try to address this?
There is nothing more to see after...

"But I was also thinking about some liberal theologians that I had seen argue that Jesus was wrong about the six days of Creation"

Man's wisdom is greater than God's? I stop reading whenever I see things like that.
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
How much more forsaken can one get when they ask God that his wrath pass by, and know that it can't? He's fully aware of God's wrath upon him. That's not just separation, that's the unadulterated torment of hell.
You do not even know what the word "forsaken" means.

How much more forsaken can one get when they ask God that his wrath pass by, and know that it can't? He's fully aware of God's wrath upon him. That's not just separation, that's the unadulterated torment of hell.


If he were forsaken he would not be able to have a discussion with the Father.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
So, I was just thinking about Luke 2:52, "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man", which of course means he did so in his human nature with his human mind, not with his divine nature. But I was also thinking about some liberal theologians that I had seen argue that Jesus was wrong about the six days of Creation, for example, which led me to consider this possible argument. My question is, how do we respond to the argument that Jesus could have been wrong and incorrect about some things in his human nature? Certainly after his resurrection, he knew all things (John 21:17) and all authority had been given to him (Matthew 28:18), but I'm unsure what verses I'd go to or what argument I'd make to show that while he didn't know everything in his humiliation, what he did know, he couldn't be wrong about. Or is that even the right way to think about it, or is it rather possible that he could've been wrong about things, but nothing that the Scriptures touch (for example, could he have done a math problem incorrectly?)

Any thoughts, or any resources that try to address this?
unlike any other person in the flesh: Jesus is one person with two natures:
The two natures are distinct and yet exist in one Person
The general rule is that
Anything that is true about either nature is true about the one person
but not everything that is true about the one person can be said to be true about the one person:

the divine nature has the attribute of omniscience : therefore the one person has the attribute of omniscience
the human nature has the ability to grow in wisdom: therefore the one person has the ability to grow in wisdom

the divine nature cannot be tempted: therefore the one person cannot be tempted
the human nature can be tempted: therefore the one person can be tempted

etc

from the Chalcedonian Creed
to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; (ἐν δύο φύσεσιν ἀσυγχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως – in duabus naturis inconfuse, immutabiliter, indivise, inseparabiliter) the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person (prosopon) and one Subsistence (hypostasis), not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten God (μονογενῆ Θεόν), the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

and from the doctrine of Communicatio idiomatum, the communication of properties

"The attributes of both natures are ascribed to the one person of Christ. In other words, the attributes of both divinity and humanity are both ascribed to the one person of Jesus. Therefore, the communicatio idiomatum means “that the properties of both, the human and the divine natures, are now the properties of the person, and are therefore ascribed to the person."
"The communicatio idiomatum does not mean, however, that anything particular to the divine nature was communicated to the human nature. Likewise, it does not mean that anything particular to the human nature was communicated to the divine nature."

-------------------------
It is ultimately, though, a doctrine we are incapable of fully understanding. It is impossible for us to fully understand how God works. We, as human beings with finite minds, should not expect to totally comprehend an infinite God.

Just proclaim what is true
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
unlike any other person in the flesh: Jesus is one person with two natures:
The two natures are distinct and yet exist in one Person


Jesus was always conscious of having two natures. But, in order to qualify to die on the Cross, he agreed only to utilize one nature. He agreed to place his Deity in neutral in regards to enabling his humanity in any way. That is why he was able to grow in wisdom as a man.

Deity knows all things and would have have made it impossible for Jesus to grow in any way concerning knowledge. By agreeing to remain as humanity he was able to be fully tested as the Second Adam. Making him qualified to die as our substitute (we are humanity) on the Cross for our atonement.

As a man he was always knowing (by faith) who and what he was, and where he had come from (heaven). But, in order to fulfill the Father's plan he was not allowed to take back up his power of deity, lest he disqualify himself to die in our place.

That is why Satan tempted Jesus to turn the stones into bread. For, if Jesus took back up His rightful powers of Deity to make bread? In the moment he did? He would then have become unable to qualify to die as 100% perfect man.

That is why tricky Satan tempted Jesus in that manner. For Jesus were only a man? No way could turning stones into becoming bread could have been a temptation. For it would have been impossible to do if he were only a man!
 

Bob Carabbio

Well-known member
Jesus was always conscious of having two natures. But, in order to qualify to die on the Cross, he agreed only to utilize one nature. He agreed to place his Deity in neutral in regards to enabling his humanity in any way. That is why he was able to grow in wisdom as a man.

Deity knows all things and would have have made it impossible for Jesus to grow in any way concerning knowledge. By agreeing to remain as humanity he was able to be fully tested as the Second Adam. Making him qualified to die as our substitute (we are humanity) on the Cross for our atonement.

As a man he was always knowing (by faith) who and what he was, and where he had come from (heaven). But, in order to fulfill the Father's plan he was not allowed to take back up his power of deity, lest he disqualify himself to die in our place.

That is why Satan tempted Jesus to turn the stones into bread. For, if Jesus took back up His rightful powers of Deity to make bread? In the moment he did? He would then have become unable to qualify to die as 100% perfect man.

That is why tricky Satan tempted Jesus in that manner. For Jesus were only a man? No way could turning stones into becoming bread could have been a temptation. For it would have been impossible to do if he were only a man!
Remember that satan's temptations started with "IF THOU BE the son of God". Apparently Jesus had to accept his "Sonship" by FAITH the same way that WE have to accept our PERFECTION BEFORE GOD as Born AGain Christians by FAITH. Obviously if Jesus was "God almighty hiding in a man suit pretending to be human" then Heb 4:15 would be untrue.
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
Remember that satan's temptations started with "IF THOU BE the son of God". Apparently Jesus had to accept his "Sonship" by FAITH the same way that WE have to accept our PERFECTION BEFORE GOD as Born AGain Christians by FAITH. Obviously if Jesus was "God almighty hiding in a man suit pretending to be human" then Heb 4:15 would be untrue.
15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses,
but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.



By making himself to become as a man (soul and body).. He enabled himself to enter into the realm of knowing what weakness and frailty is.

For, as he had been in Heaven before the Incarnation? (Deity and Soul in union) He could know no weakness in a personal way. He now became as one of us in the Incarnation, but without sin.

Being the same soul he was in Heaven, but no longer empowered by His own Deity.

In the Incarnation as a man, he needed (as a man) to fully depend upon the Holy Spirit and the Father for all His spiritual enabling required to fight the good fight to overcome evil. In doing so as a man? He pioneered the Way for us to walk in.

Apparently Jesus had to accept his "Sonship" by FAITH the same way that WE have to accept our PERFECTION BEFORE GOD as Born AGain Christians by FAITH.

It was not in the same way as for us. Jesus' soul was able to know where He came from. For His soul was the same soul that He was in heaven in union with Deity... His soul was always in on the plan. He as his soul knew all he needed to know for his soul before His soul agreed to not allow Himself to be enabled and empowered by His own Deity.

It was nothing like we must accept by faith. When He declared Himself to be God. Yet, not manifesting Himself as God in power? He was saying so by faith.
 
Top