First Word of Jesus was repent
- Thread starter Blik
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I’m still trying to think through all that you wrote.
My understanding is that the Son of God is a human person, not an attribute of God.
As Luke wrote, “For this reason“ (the begetting/conception of Jesus) the child is called the Son of God.
I see that clearly written in scripture. However, I was taught in church (Southern Baptist) that God became a man. (An incarnation of the second person - not an attribute - of the Trinity.)
I’ve been discussing Conception Christology vs. Incarnation Christology in this thread. It appears that I’m in the minority here.
My understanding is that the Son of God is a human person, not an attribute of God.
As Luke wrote, “For this reason“ (the begetting/conception of Jesus) the child is called the Son of God.
I see that clearly written in scripture. However, I was taught in church (Southern Baptist) that God became a man. (An incarnation of the second person - not an attribute - of the Trinity.)
I’ve been discussing Conception Christology vs. Incarnation Christology in this thread. It appears that I’m in the minority here.
of course not Matt, we are definitely not 'limiting' Jesus Christ's Words or Being to the NT,
He is Eternal...
'And The Lord spoke to Moses' - just an additive; 'and The Lord, Jesus, spoke to Abraham also...
it can be so hard for people to grasp these scriptures:
PROVERBS 8:1.......................................
1COR. 10:4.
And did all drink the 'same Spiritual drink: for they drank of That Spiritual Rock that followed them':
and That Rock was Christ'.
COL. 1:16.
For by Him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,
whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him:
He is here and He has always been here in one form or another to reconcile us and our lives to our Creator, Yah...
speaking of the prophets;
1PETER 1:11.
Searching what, or what manner of time The Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify,
when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and The Glory that should follow.
He is Eternal...
'And The Lord spoke to Moses' - just an additive; 'and The Lord, Jesus, spoke to Abraham also...
it can be so hard for people to grasp these scriptures:
PROVERBS 8:1.......................................
1COR. 10:4.
And did all drink the 'same Spiritual drink: for they drank of That Spiritual Rock that followed them':
and That Rock was Christ'.
COL. 1:16.
For by Him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,
whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him:
He is here and He has always been here in one form or another to reconcile us and our lives to our Creator, Yah...
speaking of the prophets;
1PETER 1:11.
Searching what, or what manner of time The Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify,
when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and The Glory that should follow.
The thread is titled, in part, “First Word of Jesus“. The conversation initially revolved around what Jesus said and when he said it in the New Testament, then the comment was made that his first word was actually spoken in Genesis.
Do you believe the first words of Jesus were spoken to us in the New Testament or in the Old Testament?
Do you believe the first words of Jesus were spoken to us in the New Testament or in the Old Testament?
There isn't one. But there is a Scriptural connection for the resurrection.
“And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers,
that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.’
(Acts 13:32-33)
This is a new concept for me too. I just noticed this a few months ago, That the begottenes of Jesus was that of His resurrection. The Father "gave rise to/ brought about" (begat) Jesus through the resurrection
“And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers,
that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.’
(Acts 13:32-33)
This is a new concept for me too. I just noticed this a few months ago, That the begottenes of Jesus was that of His resurrection. The Father "gave rise to/ brought about" (begat) Jesus through the resurrection
JOHN 1:18.
No man has seen God at any time; The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of The Father, He has declared Him.
JOHN 1:1.
In the beginning was The Word, and The Word was with God, and The Word was God.
2.
The SAME was in the beginning with God.
3.
All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and The life was the Light of men.
4.
In Him was LIFE; and The LIFE was The Light of men.
5.
And The Light shined in darkness; and the darkness comprehended It not.
Jesus has always been our earthly Intercessor: from Genesis to Revelation, period...
No man has seen God at any time; The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of The Father, He has declared Him.
JOHN 1:1.
In the beginning was The Word, and The Word was with God, and The Word was God.
2.
The SAME was in the beginning with God.
3.
All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and The life was the Light of men.
4.
In Him was LIFE; and The LIFE was The Light of men.
5.
And The Light shined in darkness; and the darkness comprehended It not.
Jesus has always been our earthly Intercessor: from Genesis to Revelation, period...
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I see begetting connected with conception of Jesus in the birth narratives. I don’t think begetting can be disconnected there from conception.
In Acts 13:32 it appears to me that Psalm 2:7 is being used in reference to his birth, not his resurrection. This also brings to my mind God’s promise in Deuteronomy 18 to raise up a prophet like Moses. That process begins with birth, not resurrection.
I think Paul moves from the subject of his birth in verse 32 to the subject of his resurrection in verse 33: “As for the fact that he raised him up from the dead...”
In Acts 13:32 it appears to me that Psalm 2:7 is being used in reference to his birth, not his resurrection. This also brings to my mind God’s promise in Deuteronomy 18 to raise up a prophet like Moses. That process begins with birth, not resurrection.
I think Paul moves from the subject of his birth in verse 32 to the subject of his resurrection in verse 33: “As for the fact that he raised him up from the dead...”
Thank you for sharing your view
Thank you for sharing your thoughts
Thank you for sharing what you appear to see
...but let's talk about what the Word says:
It may appear that way without it's clarifying commentary in the NT. Acts 13:33 clarified the meaning of Psalm 2:7.
"He raised up Jesus, as it is written in the second Psalm: ....today I have begotten you"
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts...but let's talk about what the Word says.
"as for the fact" is added in by translators. Luke wasn't intruding a new subject. It's not found in the Greek. It simply reads: "God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm ‘YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU' that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay".
I'm sorry, but that is demonstrably false.
The whole passage is about the resurrection, brother
Thank you for sharing your thoughts
Thank you for sharing what you appear to see
...but let's talk about what the Word says:
It may appear that way without it's clarifying commentary in the NT. Acts 13:33 clarified the meaning of Psalm 2:7.
"He raised up Jesus, as it is written in the second Psalm: ....today I have begotten you"
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts...but let's talk about what the Word says.
"as for the fact" is added in by translators. Luke wasn't intruding a new subject. It's not found in the Greek. It simply reads: "God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm ‘YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU' that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay".
I'm sorry, but that is demonstrably false.
The whole passage is about the resurrection, brother
Many Bible commentators see the same thing I see in the Acts passages. For example,
”The promise of Acts 13:23, the fulfillment of which is here described [Acts 13:33] has to do with the sending of the Messiah, not his resurrection, for which see v. 34.”
F.F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles, 269
I suppose you could reply that Bruce (and other scholars who hold this understanding) is wrong, and he, if he were still alive, could reply that you (and scholars who hold the understanding you have) are mistaken.
All we can do is tell one another what we see in scripture and how we understand it. You’ve done that very respectfully. Thank you.
Whether people find what we see and understand persuasive or not is out of our control.
”The promise of Acts 13:23, the fulfillment of which is here described [Acts 13:33] has to do with the sending of the Messiah, not his resurrection, for which see v. 34.”
F.F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles, 269
I suppose you could reply that Bruce (and other scholars who hold this understanding) is wrong, and he, if he were still alive, could reply that you (and scholars who hold the understanding you have) are mistaken.
All we can do is tell one another what we see in scripture and how we understand it. You’ve done that very respectfully. Thank you.
Whether people find what we see and understand persuasive or not is out of our control.
I'd think this would be something akin to the first word of Jesus.
Perhaps we would live a bit more at peace in our Lord if we realized we don't need to struggle and fret and worry about pleasing that holy spirit that is Omniscient.
Perhaps we would live a bit more at peace in our Lord if we realized we don't need to struggle and fret and worry about pleasing that holy spirit that is Omniscient.
For clarification, do you think Jesus’ first word was spoken in the New Testament or in the Old Testament?
These kinds of comments don't contribute to the conversation at all. Anyone could simply dismiss another person's point of view by saying that many people disagree with them. It's kind of a cop-out, its the tactic relativists use against Christianity.
If I don't know how to respond biblically, I simply say "I don't know", but I would never say "Well, many scholars disagree with you". There are Scholars that disagree with the inerrancy of Scripture and the Deity of Jesus. There will always be a scholar somewhere that disagrees with you and me. Their opinions for the most part is irrelevant to our reasoning of truth.
You said that you think Paul changed the subject from incarnation in verse 32 to resurrection in verse 33.
But the context shows that resurrection was already in the conversation, in fact, Luke kept returning to the idea (4 times) in the chapter... and not only in that chapter, but the whole book of Acts the theme of Jesus as the resurrected Christ is the proclamation of the Apostles.
Fact: Luke told us that the resurrection of Jesus was written about in Psalm 2:7.
You and I need to form our theology (and creeds) around the Biblical facts.
If I don't know how to respond biblically, I simply say "I don't know", but I would never say "Well, many scholars disagree with you". There are Scholars that disagree with the inerrancy of Scripture and the Deity of Jesus. There will always be a scholar somewhere that disagrees with you and me. Their opinions for the most part is irrelevant to our reasoning of truth.
You said that you think Paul changed the subject from incarnation in verse 32 to resurrection in verse 33.
But the context shows that resurrection was already in the conversation, in fact, Luke kept returning to the idea (4 times) in the chapter... and not only in that chapter, but the whole book of Acts the theme of Jesus as the resurrected Christ is the proclamation of the Apostles.
Fact: Luke told us that the resurrection of Jesus was written about in Psalm 2:7.
You and I need to form our theology (and creeds) around the Biblical facts.
God did not divide his word, man did. Blik was hoping posters would discuss repentance and she erred by asking for first words. God did not say repent was the first words, but this is the message he started His ministry with.
Posters are using the post to show Christ is eternal God, perhaps that is what the Lord wants us to remember of Him.
Posters are using the post to show Christ is eternal God, perhaps that is what the Lord wants us to remember of Him.
-
1
- Show all