Part One — Debunking the myth that Jesus didn’t have the full content of his omniscience

Some try to come to grips with Matthew 24:36/Mark 13:32 by saying that His omniscience was limited somehow, perhaps by His human nature. Or while making the statement “no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son,” He somehow shifted out of “deity mode” and into “human mode” (or something like that). Others say He voluntarily gave up (or limited) His omniscience during His thirty-three years on earth.

Some point to Philippians 2:6-8 and state that the second Person of the Trinity emptied Himself of some or all of His divine attributes when He became a man. Some also say that He didn’t do any works from His own power or divine abilities; the Holy Spirit did all the works through Him. That leaves us with an empty God on our hands. The Spirit does all the work through an empty God, leaving Jesus to simply go through the motions.

Others try to explain His lack of omniscience in Matthew 24:36/Mark 13:32 by pointing to Mark 6:5 and claiming that Jesus’ omnipotence was also limited. He was unable (or, perhaps, even incapable) of doing any mighty works while He was in Nazareth.

That’s difficult to reconcile with our belief that Jesus was fully God (Titus 2:13) and fully man (John 1:14) while He was present on earth in His incarnate form among men. If Jesus had limited divine attributes is He still fully God? I can’t seem to say yes to that question without resorting to some sort of mental gymnastics.

I believe the Biblical record shows that Jesus had all His divine attributes at all times during His incarnation. The only thing He emptied Himself of was the fullness of His glory. I’ll get to that, but first I want to point out what a few commentators say.

From the New American Commentary:
“[Matthew 24 verse] 36 proves equally significant for Christology. Christ’s words disclose his voluntary limitation of the independent exercise of his divine attributes (cf. Phil 2:6-8). Jesus was obviously not bodily omnipresent while he walked on earth. Mark 6:5 describes some restrictions on his omnipotence. Here we have a limitation on his omniscience. Christians who balk at the implications of this verse reflect their own docetism (the early Christian heresy of not accepting the full humanity of Jesus) and lack a full appreciation for the extent of God’s condescension in the incarnation and in the various human limitations he took upon himself.”

First of all, I want to state unequivocally that I agree in the full humanity of Jesus, and that I do have a “full appreciation for the extent of God’s condescension in the incarnation.” I do think we differ on what the “various human limitations he took upon himself” were. I don’t think His limitations included the fullness of His possession and use of His divine attributes. But I do take umbrage of the way the author used Mark 6:5 (“And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them.” If that were the only thing written about Jesus not performing miracles in Nazareth at that time I would have to concede the author’s point. But it’s not.

Compare that with how Matthew wrote the same thing in his Gospel: “And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief” (Matthew 13:58), and the larger context of what Mark wrote: “And He could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them. And he marveled because of their unbelief” (Mark 6:5-6).

So it’s obvious it’s not about any limitation of his omnipotence but a faith issue on the part of the people themselves. Not that Jesus is reliant upon people to believe in Him in order to perform miracles, or that there’s some special requirement to obtain healing (Jesus healed a lot of people who didn’t believe in Him—He practically banished disease in Israel during His ministry). It’s pretty obvious that a lack of faith of the people in Nazareth kept the people away from Him so that He didn’t perform miracles, and not a limitation of His omnipotence. You might ask the question, “Why didn’t He go after them anyway?” I don’t know, other than to note that all His other miracles occurred as a result of people coming to Him, being led to Him by others, or by requests made by a third party to go to the person needing healing.

I’ll get to the statement on Philippians 2:6-8 mentioned in the above commentary but first I want to take a look at another statement in a different commentary.

From the Bible Knowledge Commentary:
“The precise moment of the Lord’s return cannot be calculated by anyone. When the Lord spoke these words, that information was said to be known by only the Father. Christ was obviously speaking from the vantage of His human knowledge (cf. Luke 2:52), not from the standpoint of His divine omniscience.”

I can’t say for sure but perhaps the commentator is apparently confusing the word “wisdom” in Luke 2:52 (“And Jesus kept increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.”) as being the same as “knowledge.” They are two different things.

What does Luke mean by wisdom? There’s two kinds of wisdom: Jewish wisdom and what I call “brainiac” (or Greek) wisdom. Wisdom is often conflated with knowledge in our twenty-first century Western culture, and manifested by a verbal or written presentation of linear logic based on reason, experience, and knowledge. It is defined by Oxford Languages as “the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period.” Jewish wisdom, however, is manifested by one’s subconscious display of behavior and is made known by one’s actions. Here are some scriptures that define that sort of wisdom:
• The wise one is connected to his walk (Proverbs 10:8-9);
• Doing wickedness being like a sport to a fool is contrasted to the wisdom of a man of understanding (Proverbs 10:23);
• The way of a fool is contrasted to a wise man who listens (Proverbs 12:15)
• The wise woman builds is contrasted to the foolish one who tears it down (Proverbs 14:1).
What the person is doing (their consistent actions) shows whether they are wise or foolish.

Knowledge is, well, knowledge. Things that you know. Either you know something or you are ignorant of it. Pretty simple, I would think. One can have tons of knowledge but still lack wisdom. I’m not saying they don’t work hand in hand, of course they do, but that they are two distinct things.

So then, what did Jesus empty himself of in Philippians 2:6-8?
“[Christ Jesus] who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.”

The New American Commentary writer is focusing on the words “emptied Himself” in verse 7 and saying that that verse is a proof-text that Jesus voluntarily gave up or put a limit on his omniscience for some unspecified reason. There is nothing in the plain language of Scripture that supports that notion. There was never a time when Jesus was lacking a divine response to questions put to Him, or that put Him in a position where He had to come up with His best humanistic response. He knew the thoughts of people around Him. When Jesus’ disciples said that He knew all things (John 16:30; 21:17), He didn’t deny it. He never outright stated that He was limited in His divine attributes in any way and He plainly declared Himself to be Truth incarnated (John 14:6).

So what do the scriptures say about Jesus’ omniscience?
• And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand” (Matthew 12:25).
• But He knew what they were thinking, and He said to the man with the withered hand, “Get up and come forward!” And he got up and came forward (Luke 6:8).
• “Now we know that You know all things, and have no need for anyone to question You; by this we believe that You came from God” (John 16:30).
• He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Tend My sheep” (John 21:17).
• “And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I [Jesus] am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds” (Revelation 2:23).

So then, what did Jesus empty Himself of in Philippians 2:6-8? It was the fullness of His glory, as you can see from Exodus 33:20 (“But He said, ‘You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!’”). If Jesus had not emptied Himself of the fullness of His Glory, nobody would have been able to be in His presence during His first advent.

Here is what a writer from Ligonier Ministries had do say about the fullness of God’s glory: “Second, Moses’ request is remarkable because in response God did reveal an essential truth about His glory, namely, that it is all-consuming. As we see in today’s passage [Exodus 33:19–20], the Lord agreed to show Moses His goodness but not His face directly, for no one can see the face of God—the fullness of His glory—directly and live.” The author of Hebrews would agree, “for our God is a consuming fire” (Hebrews 12:29).

In John’s Gospel, just before going to the cross, Jesus was looking forward to the fullness of His glory being restored: “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:3). He was also looking forward to the day when all those who are saved would be able to look at His face directly in the fullness of His glory: “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).

As you can see, the issue concerning Jesus’ statement in the Olivet Discourse that He didn’t know the day and hour of His return has nothing to do with a lack of omniscience. So how do we understand what He said to His disciples? I will answer that question in the next post.