How much did Jesus know he was God?

F

foundationist.org

Well-Known Member
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Someone raised a question with me the other day, regarding Trinitarian Christian belief -

From that perspective, how much did Jesus actually know he was God?

If he was God, then was he wholly aware that he was God, only partially aware, or not at all aware?

And would this be a constant knowledge through his life, or only as he was nearing his recorded ministry?
 
I am still not quite sure where I stand on the issue of the Divinity of Jesus. I can understand something of God filling a human vessel, but I cannot comprehend God becoming human in form like some Hindu deity. The idea of the Trinity still smells too Eastern, and the heavy emphasis on the doctrination of the principle makes myself just a little cautious. After all, if it were such an essential part of following Jesus, then why did He not make a point of the issue to His disicples? And surely Saint Paul would have developed the theme in particular if relevant? The idea of quoting a string of words as if it were a philanthropic one-line philsophy just doesn't catch me very easily.

So in answer to your question, if Jesus recognised any part of Himself as Divine, I do not think He could possibly have imagined Himself as being the vastness of the Creator of the Universe shelled up in a single tiny human form. To acknowledge the self as being divine is a far different matter to imagining acknowledging the self as being a timeless entity having a merry jaunt through the physical realms! And if He were God, then why appeal to God as His Father? Why not appeal to Himself? That I think is the distinction. Unless I have read of it completely wrong!
 
Jesus Christ represents the struggle of the human versus the Divine. He was both Human and God. Can you imagine that?
 
Jesus was not God, and never claimed to be. he was "merely" an agent of God, showing us that we are of the divine. Jesus did not establish Christianity... the Church did, skewing his teaching. He called himself the Son of Man, not the Son of God. He certainly knew he was not God, but only spoke of/for God (which he accepted as an abstraction). He was a messenger, not the message. Jesus was only the candle, not the flame.
 
You raise a very important topic there ex astra. It does seem that Christianity around me has become fixated upon candles. Perhaps the curse of Christianity itself is precisely that the Messenger became God, became an object of worship, and so the message was forgotten. What a tragedy.
 
I feel this touches on one of the key problems of Biblical fundamentalism. Fundamentalists believe that the Bible is an unambiguious message from God to Man, one needing no interpretation. Unfortunately, those verses concerning Christ's divinity all can be interpreted in different ways. "He who has seen me has seen the Father" sounds like a logical congruency to Western ears: A = B, therefore B = A. But a different viewpoint might emphasize that, well, hey! I have God within me, and so people who see me see God. That doesn't mean I AM God.

Except once in a while. :cwm35:
 
How much did Jesus know he was G-d?

It's an interesting question and one that is debated amongst theologians in many Apostolic churches. I haven't seen as much open debate in non-Apostolic protestant churches on the subject, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

Many believe that Christ was born as the Christ, already annointed with the Holy Spirit(Ruach ha Kodesh in Hebrew). However, they conveniently ignore the descent of the dove(often a symbol of the descent of the Holy Spirit) at Jesus's baptism in the river Jordan. In Judaism a ritual bath called a mikveh is given to new converts to symbolize a change in their status as well as ritual purity; it is also administered at times of significant change in a person's life, much like baptism marks a change from your previous life to a Christian life.

From what survives of the accounts of Christ and his ministry it's readily apparent that he did not call himself G-d, but rather a servant of G-d. He was annointed with the Holy Spirit, but I don't believe that he was G-d, therefore he wouldn't have known he was something he wasn't. He may have been very close to G-d, he was a redeemer and messiah, but not G-d.
 
Dave the Web said:
You raise a very important topic there ex astra. It does seem that Christianity around me has become fixated upon candles. Perhaps the curse of Christianity itself is precisely that the Messenger became God, became an object of worship, and so the message was forgotten. What a tragedy.
Click to expand...

Namaste all...

a bit off the topic....

however, that was exactly what the Buddha knew would happen with his teachings as well. He even forbid pictures/statues of him whilst he was living. interestingly enough, there aren't any known images of the Buddha until the Bactarian Greeks arrived in India.

incidentally, this is also why the teachings weren't written down in the beginning... only later after the community of monks that could remember the entire cannon became few in number did the teachings become written down.
 
This is a cool topic. It's my belief that Jesus told people that if they wanted to know what God was like, they could look at him and "go off of that". People back then were looking much like people today for something concrete. Although his teachings weren't always easy to accept, he gave them that opportunity to get a concrete view for themself what God was really like. Several places in the gospels the comment is made that people remarked how Jesus taught in a different way, "with authority". Jesus said "I and the Father are One".

However, he also said when asked when the end of the world would come that "even the Son of Man does not know this and it is known only to the Father" (paraphrasing). Therefore he and God MUST logically be two different "beings" (for lack of a better word).

So I think we can look to Jesus (his teachings, etc.) when we find ourselves wondering "What is God like anyway?", because he did represent God perfectly, and even was God in the flesh -- However, there was and remains a separate being as well who is God now and was God before Jesus was born...

Jesus, in the flesh, showed people of the day what God, who is Spirit, was like.
 
Hi there, Alan G -and welcome to comparative-religion.com!

Something I always find remarkable is how easy some people can determine the nature of God! This is neither meant as a swipe or applause towards the Trinitarian issue - simply that, to myself, God is mysterious and beyond human comprehension. Therefore to ascertain with any confidence the nature of incomprehensible Divinity is also beyond my own personal understanding!
 
If Jesus was God, then he would definately know he was God. If God did not know he was God, the universe would be in a state of chaos - or cease to exist at all. God cannot suffer any form of senility, confusion or partial knowledge about a matter. God is all-knowing, and therefore incapable of confusion or partial knowledge. As for being "divine" - well, which defenition of divine? He could be divine in the "Being in the service or worship of a deity; sacred." context. But to say that Jesus - a man who ate, slept, drank, coughed, sneezed, had to learn to walk - and many things best not said - was god, is absurd.

It is clear in the Gospels that Jesus Christ preached monotheism to the Jews by quoting Deuteronomy 6:4 ( "The Lord our God is one Lord" ) and this is also expressed in other New Testament verses (Mark 12:29, Mark 12:32, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6). However, never did he say "I am the Lord your God", but said "The Lord OUR God is one Lord". Clearly, Jesus is demonstrating that he is also one of the creation.

Besides, to suggest that Jesus is God is to call the Prophets Isaiah a liar:

"I am the Lord, and there is none else : there is no God besides me : I girded thee, and thou hast not known me:
That they may know who are from the rising of the sun, and they who are from the west, that there is none besides me.
I am the Lord, and there is none else : I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil:
I the Lord that do all these things." - Isaiah 45:5-7

Clearly we see God is emphasizing there is "NONE BESIDE HIM " (refering to partners, or sons, or sub-deities, or divine beings)
by stating this three times (and who said God was subtle?) and that he has created all things (alone, with no help).

The idea of splitting God into three persons is a violation of monotheism (which Christ preached)- which advocates that:

1) There is ONE GOD

2) God is ONE

To say all three are the "One God" will not change the fact that it does not equate to one God. Infact, even the Hindus say that all their many polytheist gods form one God (Brahman? Brahma? I forgot his name).
My point is that Jesus preached that there is ONE GOD, he prayed to ONE GOD (he did not sit upside down praying to himself). Jesus, being the messiah and a prophet, and being given wisdom from God would most definately known he was not God. The Bible narrative is obviously edited to support Jesus as being divine - and it would not even suprise me if his followers eventually began worshipping him. This is nothing new. Paul - a wolf in sheep's clothing (as Jesus told us about) probably brainwashed them all with his smart mouth. A good man dies, they build a grave or a statue to commemorate him, then this turns into a shrine of respect and then eventually they're worshipping him. I'm just glad that God is merciful not to punish Jesus for this whole nonsense - as he is very much innocent of it all.

Another point is that God - being the eternal, absolute creator and sustainer of all things - cannot be "kept in a bottle". He cannot be "kept within walls", he is beyond all the universe, let alone the dishonour of being kept inside a human being (who ate, drank, slept, urinated, etc) - things which God does not do!

The idea that Jesus taught us that the divine is to be found inside of us cannot be supported by anything but a shroud of new-age speculation to try to accomodate great religious icons as being of the same belief/teachings as new-age cults at the moment. Jesus was a devout monotheist (so much so he'd probably be sent to cuba if he were born in america in this century), so the idea of him being a new-age hippy (remniscent of john lennon) with long hair, smoking pot and telling us all we're divine beings is lunacy.

Sorry if I flinched off topic (or was alittle forceful of my view, hehe) of whether jesus "KNEW" he was god. The fact that I am not god makes me aware I am not God. That would be my Point :cool:
 
is it really possible for god to "forget" he is god?

If Jesus was God, then he would definately know he was God. If God did not know he was God, the universe would be in a state of chaos - or cease to exist at all. God cannot suffer any form of senility, confusion or partial knowledge about a matter. God is all-knowing, and therefore incapable of confusion or partial knowledge. As for being "divine" - well, which defenition of divine? He could be divine in the "Being in the service or worship of a deity; sacred." context. But to say that Jesus - a man who ate, slept, drank, coughed, sneezed, had to learn to walk - and many things best not said - was god, is absurd.

It is clear in the Gospels that Jesus Christ preached monotheism to the Jews by quoting Deuteronomy 6:4 ( "The Lord our God is one Lord" ) and this is also expressed in other New Testament verses (Mark 12:29, Mark 12:32, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6). However, never did he say "I am the Lord your God", but said "The Lord OUR God is one Lord". Clearly, Jesus is demonstrating that he is also one of the creation.

Besides, to suggest that Jesus is God is to call the Prophets Isaiah a liar:

"I am the Lord, and there is none else : there is no God besides me : I girded thee, and thou hast not known me:
That they may know who are from the rising of the sun, and they who are from the west, that there is none besides me.
I am the Lord, and there is none else : I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil:
I the Lord that do all these things." - Isaiah 45:5-7

Clearly we see God is emphasizing there is "NONE BESIDE HIM " (refering to partners, or sons, or sub-deities, or divine beings)
by stating this three times (and who said God was subtle?) and that he has created all things (alone, with no help).

The idea of splitting God into three persons is a violation of monotheism (which Christ preached)- which advocates that:

1) There is ONE GOD

2) God is ONE

To say all three are the "One God" will not change the fact that it does not equate to one God. Infact, even the Hindus say that all their many polytheist gods form one God (Brahman? Brahma? I forgot his name).
My point is that Jesus preached that there is ONE GOD, he prayed to ONE GOD (he did not sit upside down praying to himself). Jesus, being the messiah and a prophet, and being given wisdom from God would most definately known he was not God. The Bible narrative is obviously edited to support Jesus as being divine - and it would not even suprise me if his followers eventually began worshipping him. This is nothing new. Paul - a wolf in sheep's clothing (as Jesus told us about) probably brainwashed them all with his smart mouth. A good man dies, they build a grave or a statue to commemorate him, then this turns into a shrine of respect and then eventually they're worshipping him. I'm just glad that God is merciful not to punish Jesus for this whole nonsense - as he is very much innocent of it all.

Another point is that God - being the eternal, absolute creator and sustainer of all things - cannot be "kept in a bottle". He cannot be "kept within walls", he is beyond all the universe, let alone the dishonour of being kept inside a human being (who ate, drank, slept, urinated, etc) - things which God does not do!

The idea that Jesus taught us that the divine is to be found inside of us cannot be supported by anything but a shroud of new-age speculation to try to accomodate great religious icons as being of the same belief/teachings as new-age cults at the moment. Jesus was a devout monotheist (so much so he'd probably be sent to cuba if he were born in america in this century), so the idea of him being a new-age hippy (remniscent of john lennon) with long hair, smoking pot and telling us all we're divine beings is lunacy.

people who are not god, usually know theyre not god unless theyre mad and jesus was not mad.

Sorry if I flinched off topic (or was alittle forceful of my view, hehe) of whether jesus "KNEW" he was god. The fact that I am not god makes me aware I am not God. That would be my Point :cool:
 
Hi there, Moslymagh - and welcome to comparative-religon.com! Nice to see someone Manx on the board! :) Hope you're looking forward to having a new cousin. :)
 
Thanks Brian :cool: I am certainly looking forward to having a new cousin. However, in the spirit of infinite possibility, I am not at liberty to limit that liking to a singular cousin -- as, who knows, there may three cousins. But of course, If you tie me to a stake and threaten to burn me, I am willing to recognize them as a single human being :)
 
Three? Oh, crikey! The first scan is in a couple of weeks so we'll find out soon enough!

I'm sure I won't need to burn you at the stake over the issue, though. :)
 
Dave the Web said:
So in answer to your question, if Jesus recognised any part of Himself as Divine, I do not think He could possibly have imagined Himself as being the vastness of the Creator of the Universe shelled up in a single tiny human form. To acknowledge the self as being divine is a far different matter to imagining acknowledging the self as being a timeless entity having a merry jaunt through the physical realms! And if He were God, then why appeal to God as His Father? Why not appeal to Himself? That I think is the distinction. Unless I have read of it completely wrong!
Click to expand...

Well said dave, i'd like to add something here.
(thetruerelgion.org)

To accept that the Ever-Living God died or to accept that the Creator became His creation is just... illogical. It is true Allah (God) is able to do all things. So, why couldn’t He become a man? Why couldn’t He have a son?

The point is, when we say Allah (God) can do anything, we’re talking about anything which is consistent with Him being Allah (God), not anything which will make him less than Allah (God). No, we don’t include those in the realm of possibilities.

So, it becomes a nonsensical question to ask, “Can the Ever-Living die?” No. Once you said “ever-living” it means “cannot die,” “never dies.” So, to ask, “Can the Ever-Living die?” is a nonsensical question. Similarly, “Can the Creator become his creation?” is nonsensical, because, if the Creator became the creation, then He is in need of a creator. He is no longer Creator. It is nonsensical.

AllahHafiz.
ps. if this sounds a little disrespectful, I m sorry. i wasnt trying to be disrespectful.
 
Faryal, there's nothing disrespectful there at all, and your posts are most welcome. :)

Discussion requires differences of opinion - all we ask here is civility among those those differences. On that count, you're doing fine, as with most members here. :)
 
A Baha'i view of Jesus:

The question was asked:

From that perspective, how much did Jesus actually know he was God?

If he was God, then was he wholly aware that he was God, only partially aware,

My reply:

I'm going to give my own understanding here as a Baha'i without a lot of references... but I can provide them if requested.

Baha'is have a concept called the Manifestation of God and we believe that Jesus Christ was a Manifestation.

We believe a Manifestation is a pure mirror that reflects perfectly the attributes of God.

So if we were alive at the time of Jesus we wold turn to Him to see what God would be like as reflected in Him.

God Himself does not physically incarnate in this world...

but His attributes can be reflected here.

In the case of Jesus, He was a unique personality and Spirit that reflected God's atrributes from the time of His appearance..

So Mary His mother was aware of this from the time of conception....

Jesus Christ or Ruh'u'llah reflected the Spirit of God. He was martyred and His Spirit continued as the Spirit cannot be crucified.

This is generally how Baha'is see it.

- Art
 
The idea that Jesus was same substance as God was a major controversy. People were horribly murdered over the topic. Once Constintine made the decision, various texts were destroyed which claimed differently. The texts of Matthew and Luke were altered to reflect that belief. The trinity ended up as a compromise theory. God and Jesus were the same, but different. One would have to swear an oath on this belief. Creeds were formed which not only stated ones belief but ridiculed the contrary belief.
The whole thing was decided by man. I am sure Jesus would be surprised at how we made him into a God.
 
When Jesus said, "He who believeth in me shall not perish but shall have everlasting life" (or something to that effect), who did he mean by "me" if not God? Why would he think he could promise people who believe in him (believed what about him?) that he could guarantee everlasting life?

Unless, of course, he was grossly misquoted, which I think likely. But if not, how could a person who said something like that NOT believe himself to be one and the same as God?

Personally, I do not believe that Jesus was God and certainly do not believe that the Bible is the word of God. I think His creation does that and is his "word."

In that vein, I think Jesus was a man who so completely experienced his connection to God that he became something "more" (whatever that is) than just an ordinary man. But if that's true, then that same ability resides within everyone.

Thoughts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top