Would Jesus have known who he was as a baby?

[FloralGums]

I was pondering this following a sermon at Midnight Mass.
Was he a totally human baby or do you think he was more than that? Was he sentient?
I was thinking of the visit of the shepherd and Magi, and the flight from Herod and if he was aware.
When do you think he became aware of his true self?
I was hoping there might be someone knowledgeable or with some insights from clerical training or something.

For clarity (incase this comes up in Active) I am posting this on Christian Mumsnetters, which is primarily intended for the use of Christians. Yes I am aware it the internet and anyone can post etc etc but I am not interested in atheists posting about sky fairies or flying spaghetti monsters so won’t be responding to those posts. Feel free to start your own discussion on Philosophy/Religion.

Yes, and there are many Bibles today that incorporate various of those forgotten writings, depending what branch of Christianity you follow. CoE has the least books in the Bible at 66. The Catholic Bible has 72, going back to the Ethiopian Bible, it has 80-ish books (can't recall the exact number). Basically there are many writings that fill in more details.

There's no proof that any human is risen. Sure, you're entitled to believe that, but there is no proof. That's the issue, faith isn't provable.

Coming to a Christian board and stating that our Lord was “mentally ill” and that His mother had “mental health issues” and continuing to argue the point is very disrespectful.

Being respectful doesn't mean never offering a different viewpoint though.

Your repeated statements that our Lord was “mentally ill” and that His mother had “mental health issues” are very disrespectful on a Christian board.
You know this.

Kindly take your theories to the

Philosophy/religion forum.

and debate them there.

Mental illness would explain a lot of the things written about jesus, it's a common theory, which I'd have thought most christians were aware of. It's completely fine if you don't believe that, but the theory exists and simply stating it isn't being disrespectful. Surely anyone with faith isn't threatened by potential other theories, if they assume their view to be absolute truth?

I've replied to this.
(Stop repöying twice to all of my comments unless you want exponential replies).

It is disrespectful HERE.

Take your repugnant theories to
👇🏻
Philosophy/religion forum.

But you're not taking any notice of the guidelines from MN at the top, are you?

Do you also behave like this on other boards you disagree with? Have you gone on the Muslim board and tried to pick holes in their faith?

My replies are relevant to the thread.
If by 'behave like this' you mean respectfully disagree, then definitely yes.

Do they comply with the statement at the top from MN? And are you doing this on other boards?

Why can't you leave Christians to their own board? What's your problem?

Interesting edit. So you do go on the Muslim board and pick holes?

It's not.
You've tried to police this thread repeatedly.

I am Christian. I believe that Jesus was fully human, fully divine.
I find it interesting that you seem to think that it is offensive to suggest that Jesus could have been disabled or gay. Now, I do think that the original poster writing that on page 1 was probably intending to be divisive/ offensive. And I've also heard people arguing that His experiences as told in the Bible are "actually mental illness", with the implication that they didn't "really" happen.
However, I don't see why we should accept the idea of mental illness as an insult. Jesus being perfect, divine, doesn't exclude him from experiencing disability. Disabled people are made in the image of God, just as non-disabled people are. Similarly with the idea of Jesus being gay - we don't know that he wasn't. We don't know if he was, either. The gospels don't mention his sex life; and if he didn't have one, that doesn't mean he was automatically straight. Some Christians interpret "the disciple who Jesus loved" in different ways, which is part of the joy of engaging with an ancient and much-translated written text.

The medieval mystics did a lot of thinking about Jesus' feminine side, with the side wound representing a vulva in much of their art. This was to do with the idea of Jesus giving new birth to humanity, and it was also to do with understanding Jesus as fully human, someone they too could relate to, not just fully man. In a similar way, disabled Christians (including those with mental illness), and lgbtq+ Christians, have often thought about how Jesus could embody different experiences of being human. Sometimes it's based on specific Bible passages. Sometimes it's a thought experiment; for many people, philosophical and theological thought experiments are a beautiful way to connect with our faith on a spiritual level.

I don't post here but this board was created for Christian MNetters to discuss their faith and support each other, not to debate on the historicity of Jesus, the Incarnation, the Resurrection or indeed the existence of God. It's been pointed out that there are more appropriate boards for this and I think it is deliberately provocative behaviour to continue to ignore guidelines.

It's a bit like going on to one of the parenting boards and expounding the view that noone should have kids.

The (Anno Domini, or "in the year of our lord") calendar system was first used in 525 by Dionysius Exiguus and didn't become popular until the 9th century.

It was based on a best guess as there were no records of Jesus to check.

Mary & Joseph didn't post a notice when he was born that all the dates had to be changed.

Thank you 💐

Thank you 💐

Thank you very much @Uricon2

Your perspective doesn’t align with the biblical description of Jesus. The Bible describes Jesus as perfect and sinless (Hebrews 4:15). His actions show wisdom, clarity, and emotional balance, not traits associated with disorders.
At 12, Jesus amazed temple teachers with His understanding (Luke 2:46-47). This wasn’t the start of His ministry but evidence of His divine wisdom.
Jesus was different because He was the Son of God, not because of any condition (John 1:14). His uniqueness was divine, not human. Was Jesus Gay? The Bible gives no evidence for this. Jesus was pure (non sexual) and focused on His mission to save humanity (Philippians 2:8). In short, Jesus’ life reflects divine perfection, not modern diagnoses. His love and mission were for all people.

You seem to believe that there are contradictions in the Bible, but they can be resolved by understanding the context and background. 2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is God-breathed,” showing it is trustworthy and inspired by God. Not all perspectives are equally valid. Interpretations must align with the Bible’s actual message. For example, Scripture consistently affirms Jesus as fully God and fully man (John 1:1-14, Philippians 2:6-8). Christian Faith is not blind but is informed by Scripture, evidence, and study. Acts 17:11 shows that testing teachings against Scripture and showing faith is meant to be thoughtful and well-grounded. Despite being written over centuries by many different authors, the Bible tells one clear story: God’s plan to save humanity through Jesus. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). This core truth is consistent throughout Scripture. It’s good to discuss different views, but not all align with the Bible’s truth. Careful study and reliance on God’s guidance help us understand it fully.

There are a lot of opinions here about the Bible and Jesus. If you don't believe in the Bible or Jesus, it’s hard for you to fully understand or offer any comment on it. The Bible is a spiritual book and is meant to be understood through faith. As 1 Corinthians 2:14 says, “The things of God are foolishness to those without the Spirit, because they are spiritually discerned.” Without belief, your opinions are missing its true meaning.

@CurlewKate
Simply you are wrong, there is evidence of a Jewish preacher at the time known as Jesus, who was condemned to death by the Romans and inspired a great number of people. Over the next 4 centuries this became Christianity.
The debate is always the concept of incarnation - was Jesus God made flesh? For Christians this is the most sacred of concepts and is not up for debate. For academics of course it is, but to continue to argue that there is no historical evidence for Jesus is just illogical.

While some myths share themes of death and rebirth, the story of Jesus is unique because it’s a real historical event, not just a myth or symbol. Jesus’ resurrection is a central event in Christianity and was witnessed by many (1 Corinthians 15:6). Most other myths, like those of Osiris or Dionysus, don't have the same kind of physical, historical resurrection.The stories of these gods may seem similar, but their deaths and resurrections are not the same. For example, Osiris’ resurrection was symbolic, not a promise of eternal life like Jesus’. Jesus came to offer salvation through His death and resurrection (John 3:16). His purpose was unique, offering eternal life to those who believe. The stories of these other gods were more about natural cycles, while Jesus' story is about God's love and the salvation of humanity through His sacrifice.While some myths share similarities, the story of Jesus stands out because it is based on a real event with a unique purpose and eternal significance.
The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus mentioned Jesus, which is an important historical reference outside of the Bible. In his book Antiquities of the Jews, written around AD 93-94, Josephus mentions Jesus as a wise man, the Messiah, and states that He was crucified by Pilate at the instigation of Jewish leaders. It says: "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand Josephus was not a Christian, but a Jewish person recording the amazing events at the time.

Jesus is not a Jewish name and there are not records of any rabbis called that around that time. The Romans kept very good records and nobody fitting his description was crucified. The Romans did not crucify people on Jewish holidays. Where are you getting this information?