1. Jewish Knowledge of Christ and Voluntary Ignorance

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Question: Did the Jews Know Christ? #

• The apparent contradiction: Scripture seems to say both that the Jewish leaders knew Christ and crucified Him from envy (Matthew 21, John 15), and that they acted in ignorance (1 Corinthians 2, Acts 3)
• Thomas’s distinction: The Jewish leaders (princes) knew Christ was the promised Messiah from the law and signs, but did not know the mystery of His divinity—that He was the Son of God by nature

Voluntary (Affected) Ignorance #

• Definition: A studied or willful ignorance where one sees evident signs but deliberately perverts or refuses them
• The princes’ error: They witnessed signs of divinity and heard Christ’s confession of divine sonship but, from hatred and envy, refused to believe or acknowledge these truths
• Biblical support: John 15:22-24 — “If I had not come and spoken to them… if I had not done deeds… they would not have sin. Now they have no excuse for their sin.”
• Moral consequence: Voluntary ignorance does not excuse from sin; it aggravates it

The Structure of Jewish Culpability #

• The greater/princes: Knew Him to be the heir/Christ from prophecy (Psalm 2, Matthew 21) but not the mystery of divine sonship; their ignorance was voluntary
• The lesser/common people: Did not fully know Him to be the Christ; they were deceived by their princes and deserve more leniency (Peter’s intercession: “through ignorance you did this, just as your princes”)

Figures of Speech in Scripture #

Antonomasia (ἀντονομασία) #

• Definition: Giving the name of a universal to one particular that stands out
• Example: “The Word” (John 1:1) — among all thoughts, this one stands out:
  1. It is the only thought God has
  2. It expresses fully what God is
  3. It is the only subsisting thought (a person)
  4. It is God itself
• Application: Christ is THE beginning and THE end by antonomasia (Revelation 21-22)

Synecdoche (συνεκδοχή) #

• Definition: Giving the name of a part to the whole or vice versa
• Example: “The Word was made flesh” (John 1:14) — flesh stands for complete human nature
• Warning: Heretics like Arius and Apollinaris erred by taking this literally rather than figuratively, substituting the Word for a soul

Key Arguments #

For Knowledge (Objections) #

1. Matthew 21: The farmers/rulers, seeing the heir, killed him—implying they knew the significance
   • Jerome: “Christ shows the princes knew, not by ignorance, but by envy”
2. John 15: “Now they see and hate me and my Father”—what is seen is manifestly known
3. Council of Ephesus passage: Those who crucify the one they see presume to give punishment to God Himself—impossible without knowledge of divinity
4. Psalm 2 connection: If they knew Him as the one to whom “Ask of me and I will give the Gentiles,” they knew the Son of God

Against Knowledge (Counter-Arguments) #

1. 1 Corinthians 2:8: “If they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory”
2. Acts 3:17: Peter: “I know that in ignorance you did this”
3. Luke 23:34: Christ: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”

Thomas’s Resolution #

The Jewish leaders knew Christ was the promised Christ (from law and miracles), but their ignorance was voluntary—they deliberately refused the evident signs pointing to His divine nature. This ignorance:

• Does not excuse them (they could have believed the signs)
• Aggravates their sin (willful rejection of truth)
• Explains both Scripture passages without contradiction

Important Definitions #

• Affected ignorance (ignorantia affectata): Studied unwillingness to see or acknowledge evident truth, motivated by passion (envy, hatred)
• Universal whole vs. composed whole: Applied to understanding antonomasia (universal) and synecdoche (composed)
• Antonomasia (ἀντονομασία): One particular so outstanding it receives the universal name
• Synecdoche (συνεκδοχή): Part-to-whole or whole-to-part substitution

Examples & Illustrations #

The Parable of the Wicked Tenants (Matthew 21) #

• The farmers recognize the heir and kill him
• Signifies the rulers of the people who knew Him as the Christ promised in law
• Their crime was not simple ignorance but deliberate rejection

The Two Angels at Christ’s Tomb (John 20) #

• One angel at the head (divinity): “In the beginning was the Word”
• One angel at the feet (humanity): “The Word was made flesh”
• Shows the complementary truths expressed by antonomasia and synecdoche

Voluntary Ignorance in Modern Context #

• Abortion: People claim ignorance about what abortion is; in the information age with Vatican websites and libraries, this ignorance may be voluntary
• Church teaching: Many in pews don’t know what the Church teaches (Real Presence, etc.); sympathetically, some are never taught in pulpits, but the availability of information makes some ignorance voluntary

Notable Quotes #

“The princes of the Jews crucified the Son of God not by ignorance, but by envy.” — Jerome (via Matthew 21)

“If they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” — 1 Corinthians 2:8

“If I had not come and spoken to them… if I had not done deeds… they would not have sin. Now they have no excuse for their sin.” — John 15:22-24

“I know that through ignorance you did this, just as your princes.” — Peter, Acts 3:17

Questions Addressed #

1. Did the Jewish persecutors know Christ was the Son of God?

   • Resolution: The princes knew He was the promised Christ but not the mystery of His divinity; common people knew less and were deceived by leaders

2. Does ignorance excuse the Jews from sin?

   • Resolution: Voluntary ignorance aggravates rather than excuses; they deliberately rejected evident signs

3. How do antonomasia and synecdoche function in understanding Christ?

   • Application: Both figures concern whole-part relationships; antonomasia expresses the universal uniqueness of the Word’s divinity; synecdoche properly conveys His assumed humanity

4. Why does Scripture speak of the Jews both as knowing and as ignorant?

   • Resolution: Different levels of knowledge and different aspects (Messiah vs. divine nature) are at stake; apparent contradiction dissolves with careful theological distinction