Explore the deep theological questions surrounding Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36, including the subordination of the Son to the Father within the Trinitarian framework. Understand the nuanced biblical doctrine that encapsulates Jesus as fully God yet functionally subordinate to the Father. This article navigates through these complex issues by employing a historical-grammatical method of interpretation.

The enigmatic verses of Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 have been a point of theological debate and discussion for centuries. These verses, spoken by Jesus Christ himself, address the limits of the Son’s knowledge concerning the exact timing of the end of the age. While the topic is indeed intriguing, it is crucial to remain faithful to the Historical-Grammatical Method for the most accurate interpretation.

Textual Authenticity: An Essential Starting Point

Before we delve into the interpretation, it’s worth mentioning the textual evidence for these passages, especially Matthew 24:36, which has some variants. The phrase “nor the Son” is supported by reliable manuscripts like א*, B, D, Θ, and f13. Although some manuscripts omit the phrase, the evidence leans toward its originality, making it critical to our discussion.

Linguistic and Grammatical Examination

Both Mark and Matthew employ the Greek term “oiden” (οἶδεν) meaning “knows” or “to know.” In both contexts, the verb is used in the absolute sense, emphasizing the totality of not knowing something specific—namely, “the day or the hour.”

Understanding “the Father only”: The Greek word “monos” (μόνος) modifies “the Father,” underscoring the exclusive nature of the Father’s knowledge about the timing of future events.

Theology of the Son’s Limitation

The next key point is understanding what it means that even “the Son” does not know the timing. In a Trinitarian framework, this seems paradoxical, given the Son’s divinity. However, it’s important to consider Christ’s incarnation, during which He voluntarily limited certain divine prerogatives (Philippians 2:5-8). Therefore, this limitation in knowledge does not detract from Christ’s divinity but rather underscores the profundity of His kenotic state—His emptying Himself in becoming human.

Angels in Heaven: Mark and Matthew both mention that not even the angels in heaven know the time. This emphasizes the severity of the limitation on knowledge, as even heavenly beings are not privy to this information.

Historical and Cultural Context

It’s worth noting that eschatological predictions were popular in Second Temple Judaism. Jesus, in stating His own ignorance of the exact timing, sets Himself apart from those who claimed or would claim to know such times or dates.

Christocentric Focus in Context

While the focus of our texts is often placed on the Son’s limitations, we should not forget that these statements are part of a larger discourse on readiness and preparedness for the end times. The Christocentric focus of these chapters implies that while the Son might not know ‘when,’ He is undoubtedly the one who will enact the eschatological climax.

Conclusion: Embracing the Mystery with Theological Precision

Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 are not an assault on the Son’s divinity but rather an affirmation of His true humanity in the incarnation. These verses, supported textually and understood historically and grammatically, show a Jesus who is fully divine but who also fully participated in human limitations.

Let the mystery draw us into a more profound understanding and appreciation of who Christ is—both God incarnate and the expectant Lord who will return at a time known only to the Father. This dual identity of Christ enriches our Christian faith and amplifies our earnest longing for His imminent return.

After Christ’s Ascension Back to the Father

The issue of whether Christ, after His ascension back to the Father, then knew “the day or the hour” of His return is a complex and nuanced theological question. The New Testament does not explicitly address this issue, so any answer must be inferred from the broader theological and Christological context of Scripture.

The Nature of Christ’s Incarnation and His Post-Ascension State

First, it’s crucial to consider the nature of Christ’s incarnation. According to Philippians 2:5-8, Christ emptied Himself, taking on human form and limitations, including, evidently, limitations in knowledge as expressed in Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36. Once He ascended to heaven, the state of His self-imposed limitations would presumably have changed, although the New Testament does not provide explicit details on this matter.

The Eternal Sonship and Omniscience

In traditional Trinitarian theology, the Son is understood to be co-eternal and co-equal with the Father, sharing the Father’s attributes, including omniscience. The concept of divine omniscience would suggest that the Son, in His divine nature, would have complete knowledge, including knowledge of the “day and the hour.”

The Mediatorial Role of Christ

It is essential to remember that Christ continues His mediatorial role between God and humanity even after His ascension (1 Timothy 2:5). Some theologians might argue that for Christ to perform this role effectively, it might not be necessary for Him to know the “day or the hour” of His own return, as that information is tied to the Father’s sovereign plan for the fullness of time (Ephesians 1:9-10).

Absence of Explicit Information

Scripture does not provide explicit information to answer this question definitively. Thus, we are left with a degree of theological speculation based on the attributes and roles attributed to the Son throughout the New Testament.

Concluding Thoughts

Given the complexities involved and the absence of explicit Scriptural guidance, caution is warranted in offering a definitive answer. While it is plausible that the Son, in His divine nature and now glorified state, would know the “day or the hour,” we should humbly acknowledge that this is a matter on which Scripture is silent. Therefore, our focus should remain on being prepared and vigilant for Christ’s return, as He Himself instructs in the broader context of Mark 13 and Matthew 24.

The Paradox of the Incarnation

The question of how Jesus could be “fully God” and yet not know “the day or the hour” of His return is indeed a challenge, but it is a challenge primarily arising from the paradoxical nature of the Incarnation itself. According to orthodox Christian doctrine, Jesus is both fully God and fully man, as reflected in passages like John 1:1-14 and Colossians 2:9.

Kenotic Theory: The Self-Emptying of Christ

Philippians 2:5-8 tells us that Christ, though in the form of God, emptied Himself by taking the form of a servant and being born in the likeness of men. This “self-emptying” is often termed “kenosis,” from the Greek word used in the passage. The kenotic theory postulates that Jesus willingly set aside some of His divine attributes during His time on earth. In this perspective, His lack of knowledge regarding the specific timing of His return could be understood as part of this voluntary self-limitation.

Hypostatic Union: Two Natures in One Person

According to the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union, the divine and human natures of Christ exist perfectly in Jesus Christ. Each nature retains its own attributes, yet they exist in a single Person. Within this framework, it is conceivable that the divine nature of Christ did possess full knowledge (including knowing “the day or the hour”), while His human nature did not. Importantly, during His earthly ministry, Jesus operated primarily out of His human nature, being subject to limitations like fatigue, hunger, and limited knowledge.

Divine Roles and Relational Subordination

It’s also useful to consider the concept of relational subordination within the Trinity. According to passages like John 5:19 and 8:28, Jesus acted in complete unity with the Father but also under the Father’s directive will. As such, it’s conceivable that it was the Father’s prerogative alone to know the timing of the Second Coming, and Jesus, in His role as the Son, submitted to that arrangement during His earthly ministry.

The Importance of Biblical Context

It is worth noting that the context of the passages in Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 involves a discourse on the end times where Jesus is encouraging preparedness and watchfulness. The immediate point is less about defining the boundaries of His omniscience and more about urging constant readiness since the timing is known only to the Father.

Concluding Thoughts

The question raises a profound theological issue that has been the subject of considerable discussion over the centuries. Ultimately, the Scriptures affirm both the full deity and full humanity of Christ. How these two natures coexist in one Person, and how they interact with respect to attributes like knowledge, is a divine mystery that may never be fully comprehensible to finite human minds. Nonetheless, these limitations in our understanding should not negate the clear biblical teachings about the deity and humanity of Christ. Rather, they should inspire a sense of awe and wonder at the inscrutable richness of God’s nature and plan.

The Subordination of the Son to the Father in the Trinitarian Economy

The notion of the Son being subordinate to the Father is a topic often met with misunderstanding or misrepresentation, yet it is a theme that is deeply embedded in the fabric of Scripture.

Subordination in Authority, Not Essence

It’s important to clarify upfront that the subordination discussed here does not imply inferiority in essence or nature. According to orthodox Christian doctrine, the Father and the Son are equal in essence, both being fully God. This is reflected in verses like John 1:1 and Colossians 2:9. However, the New Testament does present a functional or economic subordination within the Godhead.

The Son’s Subordination Before His Earthly Ministry

The concept of the Son being subordinate to the Father appears to be a feature of their eternal relationship, not just an aspect of the Incarnation. For example, in John 1:18, the Son is described as being in the “bosom of the Father,” implying an eternal relationship of intimacy but also of derivation and subordination.

The Son’s Subordination During His Earthly Ministry

The earthly life of Jesus is filled with expressions of His subordination to the Father. He says, “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me” (John 6:38, ESV). The Gospel accounts consistently depict Jesus as seeking the Father’s will, receiving authority from the Father, and deferring to the Father’s greater knowledge, as in Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36.

The Son’s Subordination After His Ascension

Even after His ascension, the Son remains subordinate to the Father. As you pointed out, Revelation 1:1 says, “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him,” indicating that the Father is the source of the revelation that the Son then passes on to John. This could not be clearer in showing the Son’s subordination to the Father even after His earthly ministry had concluded. In 1 Corinthians 15:28, Paul describes how the Son will be subject to the Father in the eschaton once all things have been subdued to Him, so that “God may be all in all.”

Revelation and the Son’s Knowledge

The question about Revelation being given to Jesus by the Father in 96 C.E. does present an interesting angle. If Jesus was fully divine, wouldn’t He already have known what was to be revealed? While it may be tempting to attribute this to a limitation in the Son’s knowledge, it is more consistent with the overall biblical narrative to see it as a representation of the Son’s ongoing subordination to the Father in the Trinitarian economy. The Father is the source, the Son is the means, and the Spirit is the power in this triune relationship.

In Summary

The functional or economic subordination of the Son to the Father is a consistent biblical theme that does not diminish the full deity of the Son. Rather, it highlights the roles and relationships within the Trinity, each Person of which contributes uniquely to the divine plan of salvation and revelation.

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).