If Jesus is God, why doesn’t he know the day or the hour?
Read two verses further and the objection falls apart. Jesus puts himself above every angel in heaven. Then he explains what he means with a story about a master who goes away and servants who do not know when he is coming back — and the master obviously knows. On top of that, the Greek word for “know” is often used to mean “make known”. Announcing the day is the Father’s job. That is not the same as the Son being in the dark.
This is one of the most quoted objections there is. Jesus says that nobody knows the day or hour of his return except the Father — Mark 13:32KJVBut of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.. If he does not know something, how can he be God?
It deserves a straight answer rather than a clever one. And almost everything turns on reading a bit further than the objection does.
First, look at the order he puts himself in
Jesus is not lumped in with everyone else who does not know. He is ranked.
The sentence goes: no man knows — not even the angels of heaven — not the Son — but the Father. Follow the ladder. He puts himself above every angel in existence, and directly below the Father. And he does not call himself a son. He calls himself the Son, with nothing added.
That is a very strange way to demote somebody.
Now keep reading. He explains it with a story
Here is the part that almost never gets quoted, and it changes the whole meaning.
Straight after saying this, Jesus tells a short parable to explain it. A man goes away on a long journey. He leaves his servants in charge of the house and tells them to stay awake, because — Mark 13:35KJVWatch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning. — “ye know not when the master of the house cometh.”
So ask the obvious question. Does the master know when he is coming back to his own house? Of course he does. He is the one travelling.
The whole point of the story is that the servants do not know. And in the story, Jesus is plainly the master who goes away and returns.
He told that parable to explain the sentence. It is not a change of subject.
And “know” can mean “make known”
There is a second thing worth knowing, about the Greek.
The word translated knoweth in that verse is oida. In Greek it covers more ground than our English word “know”. It can also carry the sense of declaring something, or making it known.
Here is the clearest example in the New Testament. Paul writes to the church at Corinth and says, 1 Corinthians 2:2KJVFor I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified., that he “determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.”
Nobody thinks Paul is saying he had forgotten everything else — his own name, or where he was. He means he decided to talk about nothing else. Same verb.
Read Mark 13:32 that way and it says something quite different. It says it is not for anyone — not the angels, not even the Son — to announce that day. Making it known is the Father’s part.
Jesus uses exactly that picture elsewhere. Matthew 22:2KJVThe kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son. compares God’s kingdom to a king who puts on a wedding for his son. In the Jewish custom behind that image, the father is the one who announces the wedding day. The groom is hardly ignorant of his own wedding. He simply is not the one who names the hour.
The same Gospel has him knowing the unknowable
If the Gospel writers thought this admission destroyed his claim to be God, they had a very strange way of showing it.
A few chapters earlier, Matthew 9:4KJVAnd Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? has him reading his critics’ private thoughts. Elsewhere he says what the cities of Tyre and Sidon would have done in circumstances that never actually happened — which is not something you find out by watching.
Matthew wrote both things down, a few chapters apart, without any sign that he saw a problem.
Objections answered
God knows everything, so if Jesus doesn’t know something he isn’t God.
The first half is right. The conclusion does not follow, because the objection quietly assumes Jesus is only one thing.
Christians have always said he is two: fully God and fully man, at the same time. God as God knows everything. A human mind does not. If you rule out in advance that he could be both, the objection works — but then it is not an argument against the belief. It is just a refusal of it, dressed as one.
Isn’t “two natures” just a convenient escape hatch?
It would be, if Christians had invented it to get out of this one verse. They did not.
The idea was worked out because the whole New Testament forces the problem. The same person is worshipped and prays. He creates and he sleeps. He forgives sins and he dies. Something had to account for all of it at once.
And the other half is stated just as plainly: Colossians 2:9KJVFor in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. says that in Christ “dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” Nothing is missing.
So was he lying when he said he didn’t know?
No, and neither reading needs him to be.
If you take the parable-and-announcement reading, he is saying the day is not his to announce — which is simply true. If you take the two-natures reading, the limit was real in his human mind — which is also simply true.
What you must never say is that he knew and was hiding it for effect. That gains you nothing and costs you his honesty.
Shared ground, and where traditions differ
All Christians hold
Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants all confess that Jesus Christ is one person with two natures, fully God and fully man, and that the two are neither mixed together nor separated. This was settled at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. None of them reads this verse as evidence that the Son is a created being.
Catholic
Holds the classical position: as God his knowledge is complete, while his human mind knew things humanly.
Orthodox
Holds the same, and points to a later council in 681 which defined that Christ has both a divine and a human will.
Protestant
Agrees with Chalcedon. Some later Protestant theologians prefer to say the Son voluntarily set aside the use of certain divine abilities while on earth.
Related questions
Inspired by God Logic Apologetics. The argument is theirs; the words here are ours.
Did this answer the question?