Study of the Knowing of the Hour of His Return

But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. (Mk 13:32)

First let me say what this piece is not. It is not one of many meditations written by modern-day “prophets” suggesting possible dates and times for his return. I think there is enough ammo out there against that sort of thing. But this missive is a little different: it is more about God’s motive for telling the apostles that the return date was thus unknown by him. Also, I seek not to write an opinion piece, but merely a survey of some of the views out there on this.

Several of the Church Fathers felt that Jesus actually did know the hour of his return. After all, he is God, consubstantial with the Father, the Word made flesh, etc. The Church Fathers argued extensively, and quite elegantly then, that it was simply not possible for him not have known the hour of his return. He said what he said because, they contend, he needed to deflect the apostles from begging of him his return trip information.

The Blessed Theophylact likened it to a father trying to hide something in his hand and his child crying incessantly to see it. The father, finally, puts the object away and opens his hands instead showing nothing there, and thus satisfying the child. This is an endearing explanation. But my question is this:  would Jesus have told a little white lie?

In fact, there are many other takes on this account from the Holy Fathers too. The “philological argument,” by St. Basil the Great, holds that a slight mis-transliteration bars us from understanding what Jesus Christ really meant. A more accurate translation from the original Greek would have stated, But of that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, if not (ei me) the Father.” Here he was actually saying that because he was the Son of God, not simply a son of God (like, someone in God’s good graces), but the Son who is consubstantial with the Father, prophesied by Scripture. Indeed, Jesus was saying, according to this view, that he did know the hour because he and the Father are one. (“Oh, and by the way, I’m still not telling.”)

Another concept, put forth by St. Augustine, maintains that “to know” in this use connotes “to reveal.” In other words, he had knowledge of it on one level as one aspect of the godhead, but was simply not revealing the time yet. There is something appealing in that explanation, because it tells us that there are several more degrees of God’s “knowing.” God already knows everything, but the way and timeline and manner in which He reveals things to us is beyond human comprehension.

Another interesting explanation of this maintains that Jesus, who had not yet ascended to the Father and into timeless eternity, could not have discerned, from that present perspective, the when of the impending end-time. Francis Gumerlock wrote in Trinity Journal: “The main strength of Athanasius’s anthropological interpretation is that it harmonizes with Luke’s Gospel, which assigns to Christ a growth in wisdom. Since the Gospel writer claims that the Christ-child “grew in wisdom and stature” (Luke 2:52), it is inferred that Christ was ignorant of certain things.”

In the final analysys, it should not matter if Jesus did know or did not know, or knew but not in a way that could have revealed anything to us. The point is that we are not supposed to know the hour of his return. We are charged to Watch and pray. I don’t understand why so many theologians both now and throughout the ages have taken stabs at this sacred subject. Moreover, that “unknowingness” makes our Christian walks all the more exciting.