The Omniscience of Jesus

So today in Composition our professor began by reading a memo by some theological guy I can't remember the name of and asked us for our impression of what he said and if we had a response. We wrote down what we would say and he will read some next class session and I'm thinking mine will be included because as always I had a lot to say. 

The writer of the memo, O'Reilley, or something like that, claimed that Jesus couldn't have been all knowing stating simple things that Jesus did, but stressing the fact that Jesus walked over to the fig tree before he cursed it for not having any fruit. He says that this implies that Jesus walked over expecting to have his hunger satisfied. The author goes on to say that this in fact does not challenge the aspect of Christ that was 100% divine as well as 100% human.

Bull. If someone is claiming that Christ was not all knowing here on earth than we lose the idea that Christ is the image of God here on earth. You see, I fully believe that God is transcendent, meaning that the human mind cannot possibly grasp all that is the Holy God. However, there is a way to look at the "eminent" God, that is to say the here and now. The thing that bridges the transcendent God and the eminent God is the God incarnate. That of course refers to Jesus Christ. Scripture says that the Word was God in the beginning and the Word became flesh, once again referring to Christ. So if Christ is everything that God is, then why is he not omniscient? The author of this memo at one point said that he believes that God the Father simply chose to not reveal everything to Jesus the Son. I would have to argue the other way though. I would say that rather than God not revealing everything to Jesus, I would have to say that it was Jesus who did not reveal everything he knew to us. 

Some of the points used by this author could point to Christ not being omniscient, like the usage of the story of Christ not knowing when the second coming was, the identity of the bleeding woman who touched him, and the idea that he didn't know that the fig tree was bare. Well let's look at these with the idea that Christ didn't reveal them for specific reasons. If Christ had revealed that he knew the exact moment in time why would we always be ready for his return. Most of us would simply forget the now and live life the world's way and not the Lord's way, that is up until the point when Christ said he would come. As for the bleeding woman this is one that I thought of the answer for right away. When Jesus called for the person who touched him I honestly believe he knew exactly who it was. What this served as was a call to faith. He called the bleeding woman out on her faith to reveal herself and who she was. She stepped out onto that step of faith admitting to what she did and the belief she had in Christ. As for the fig tree doesn't Christ constantly move toward us? We are the fig tree in that Christ will always come to us, whether we bear fruit or not. It is our duty however, to become trees that bear fruit for Christ, or rather people who live out the life we are supposed to in Christ so that others may enjoy Christ through us and may get to know his glory. If there is anyone out there that reads this blog I would definitely love to hear your thoughts on this and what you tend to believe.

"Some say that it may be that God the Father in Heaven chose not to reveal everything to Christ. I would argue that rather than Christ's knowledge being limited it is more likely that our knowledge is insufficient to comprehend why Christ, who knew all things, chose not to reveal things to us as humans."