Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: P-Marlowe; lockeliberty; xzins
When Jesus said that he did not know the day or the hour of his return, was he telling the truth?.... What's your theory?

My theory is that your theory is based on a misuderstanding of Scripture.

If you look at the Greek, the better translation of the word given as "know" is almost certainly "make known".

See this analysis: Did Jesus Not Know the Hour of His Second Coming?

That said, of course, it is a given that Omniscience is a function of Christ's Divine Nature, not a function of His Human Nature.
However, when -- at any time during the Incarnation -- was the Person of Christ separate from His Divine Nature? Answer: NEVER.

303 posted on 12/05/2003 10:18:30 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies ]


To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; xzins
But of that day and that hour no man will make known, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father (only will announce it).

Methinks you are engaged in a bit of scripture twisting ala 1 Tim 2:4.

From Albert Barnes Commentary:

Mar 13:32 -

Neither the Son - This text has always presented serious difficulties. It has been asked, If Jesus had a divine nature, how could he say that he knew not the day and hour of a future event? In reply, it has been said that the passage was missing, according to Ambrose, in some Greek manuscripts; but it is now found in all, and there can be little doubt that the passage is genuine. Others have said that the verb rendered “knoweth” means sometimes to “make” known or to reveal, and that the passage means, “that day and hour none makes known, neither the angels, nor the Son, but the Father.” It is true that the word has sometimes that meaning, as in 1Co_2:2, but then it is natural to ask where has “the Father” made it known? In what place did he reveal it?

After all, the passage has no more difficulty than that in Luk_2:52, where it is said that Jesus increased in wisdom and stature. He had a human nature. He grew as a man in knowledge. As a man his knowledge must be finite, for the faculties of the human soul are not infinite. As a man he often spoke, reasoned, inquired, felt, feared, read, learned, ate, drank, and walked. Why are not all these, which imply that he was a “man” - that, “as a man,” he was not infinite - why are not these as difficult as the want of knowledge respecting the particular “time” of a future event, especially when that time must be made known by God, and when he chose that the man Christ Jesus should grow, and think, and speak “as a man?”

305 posted on 12/05/2003 10:39:27 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson