You people

[Matthias]

The focus shouldn’t be shifted away from Jesus preaching the gospel of God, which is the gospel of the kingdom. It is acceptance or rejection of the teaching and preaching of Jesus and the apostles that is the issue in the New Testament.

”You people” have refused to believe “my“ preaching and teaching. Unless “you” do, “you” will perish.

 

[Hiddenthings]

The focus shouldn’t be shifted away from Jesus preaching the gospel of God, which is the gospel of the kingdom. It is acceptance or rejection of the teaching and preaching of Jesus and the apostles that is the issue in the New Testament.

”You people” have refused to believe “my“ preaching and teaching. Unless “you” do, “you” will perish.

The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to clarify that the following verbs (“heard,” “seen,” “have residing,” “do not believe”) are second person plural.

 

[Hiddenthings]

NET sn

You have never heard his voice or seen his form at any time" (cf. Deut. 4:12). Also consider Deuteronomy 5:24 and the verses that follow, where the Israelites pleaded not to hear God's voice again out of fear. Ironically, by this point in history, their request has effectively been fulfilled, they no longer hear his voice.

This irony becomes even more striking if the context is the Feast of Pentecost, which by the 1st century A.D. had come to commemorate the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai. That very moment when God's voice was once heard and feared is now remembered yet his voice is no longer recognised or received.

 

[Matthias]

 

[Hiddenthings]

At Sinai, the people seemed to say, "We can hear Him and live—but let’s not hear Him, just in case we die!"

It makes me wonder about our attitude today. When we truly hear Him, the spiritual person comes alive, but the natural self must die, and perhaps, deep down, we don't always want that to happen.

 

[Hiddenthings]

He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony. John 3:31-32

"Not that the testimony that I receive is from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved." John 5:34

The discerning mind will quickly recognize that Christ also received the very same testimony!

Saved!

 

[Brakelite]

True, but he never claimed equality. There's an important principle here, Matthias, one the Lord still upholds to this day and always will.

And you're right about your second point.

I think the equality question depends upon where you are coming from. There are 3 main options. Mathias's, as a messianic, as he explained above, the Trinitarian perspective that assumes all 3 members of the Godhead as being perfectly equal, and those who summer described as semi Arian, who believe the Son is literally ontologically the Son of the Father and therefore equal in nature, but not in rank.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I think the equality question depends upon where you are coming from. There are 3 main options. Mathias's, as a messianic, as he explained above, the Trinitarian perspective that assumes all 3 members of the Godhead as being perfectly equal, and those who summer described as semi Arian, who believe the Son is literally ontologically the Son of the Father and therefore equal in nature, but not in rank.

The Scriptures highlight that the glorified Christ is equal in nature and united in purpose and understanding with the Father yet remains subordinate to Him in role and authority. The topic becomes muddled when viewed through a Trinitarian lens, especially when applying that perspective to Christ as the Son of Man and attempting to infer pre-existence. Personally, I believe it's written this way because, in many ways, truth is intentionally veiled and not immediately obvious.

 

[Brakelite]

The Scriptures highlight that the glorified Christ is equal in nature and united in purpose and understanding with the Father yet remains subordinate to Him in role and authority. The topic becomes muddled when viewed through a Trinitarian lens, especially when applying that perspective to Christ as the Son of Man and attempting to infer pre-existence. Personally, I believe it's written this way because, in many ways, truth is intentionally veiled and not immediately obvious.

I think the evidence in support for a pre-incarnation Son is stronger than inference.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I think the evidence in support for a pre-incarnation Son is stronger than inference.

The Apostles derived their understanding from the Old Testament prophecies, for example, John 1:1 draws on Genesis 1:1, Philippians heavily reflects themes from Isaiah, and Galatians is deeply rooted in the Servant Songs and messages of the prophets. Their teachings were built on the foundation of the Hebrew Scriptures. All we have is "Logos" from which all things exist, past, present, and future! Unfortunately, the early Church Fathers did not follow the Apostles lead causing them to deflect into many hurtful lusts. All will be revealed at his coming!

 

[Matthias]

There is a strong tendency in many quarters to read the narrative as a 1st century all-Jewish confrontation about who the God of the Jews is when, in fact, it is a 1st century all-Jewish confrontation about whether or not Jesus is the Messiah whom the God of the Jews had promised through his prophets that he would raise up and send.

 

[Hiddenthings]

There is a strong tendency in many quarters to read the narrative as a 1st century all-Jewish confrontation about who the God of the Jews is when, in fact, it is a 1st century all-Jewish confrontation about whether or not Jesus is the Messiah whom the God of the Jews had promised through his prophets that he would raise up and send.

The Gospel wasn't about introducing a "new" God. The real issue was that the God of the Old Testament had never fully revealed himself in a human until Jesus. You only have to read Isaiah 50 to begin to understand this.

 

[Matthias]

The Gospel wasn't about introducing a "new" God.

That’s surely correct. The God of the New Testament is none other than the God of the Hebrew Bible.

The real issue was that the God of the Old Testament had never fully revealed himself in a human until Jesus.

There is also the issue of disobedient Jews misrepresenting the God of the Hebrew Bible (i.e. the Old Testament) to the nations.

You only have to read Isaiah 50 to begin to understand this.

What would you say the odds are that a Jewish monotheist who believes Jesus of Nazareth (himself a Jewish monotheist) is the Messiah, Son of the God of the Hebrew Bible / New Testament hasn’t read Isaiah 50?

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Matthias here's something to consider.... Imagine if the Gospel & Epistles accounts were all written in Hebrew?

 

[Matthias]

@Matthias here's something to consider.... Imagine if the Gospel & Epistles accounts were all written in Hebrew?

My mind is focusing on your suggestion. What do you think would have happened if they had been?

 

[Hiddenthings]

My mind is focusing on your suggestion. What do you think would have happened if they had been?

Loaded question

 

[Matthias]

Loaded question

If it is and it would then you’re not thinking about it what I’m thinking about it.

 

[Hiddenthings]

If it is and it would then you’re not thinking about it what I’m thinking about it.

Very cryptic Matthias!

I believe it's what you expect I would be thinking

 

[Hiddenthings]

Much confusion among Christians has arisen from the misuse of the Greek language. Many of these issues could be avoided if believers would ground their understanding in the Old Testament prophecies and align with them, rather than being swayed by external or misleading influences.

 

[Matthias]

Very cryptic Matthias!

I believe it's what you expect I would be thinking