On the Christology of Acts – Speakers’ Corner

I invited Josh to have a discussion about the Christology of Acts. From my reading of Acts Jesus appears to be figure who is very much subordinate to God. God has made Jesus Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36); Jesus is supremely a man chosen by God to do God’s will (Acts 2:22; 17:31). The sermons of Paul and Peter are remarkable for the absence of any Trinitarian theology.  Josh is doing a PhD in Christian theology at King’s College, London. He is an Orthodox Christian. He is an excellent chap and I hope to have many discussions with him in the future.

Categories: Christology, New Testament scholarship, Speakers' Corner

2 replies

  1. To say that someone is at the right hand of God is to declare him equal to God. It is a statement about the rank of that person which has ontological implications.

    Acts identifies both Jesus and the Father as the same LORD, which means they are the same God:

    The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.

    Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:

    14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.

    15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

    7 v 60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

    Repenting for intentional sin is an oxymoron. Or in other words an impossibility. In that case the “repentance” would be part of the sinful plan of action. This is why the law is careful to state that the forgiveness depends on the absence of premeditation.

    As the temple sacrifices are just types the forgiveness is not dependant on the type always and in every instance being carried out. Repentance is not a type so it essential for forgiveness. This is why the Jews did not, and could not, offer sacrifices in exile when there was no temple. They were still forgiven by God.

    The throne of Israel can be identified with the throne of Jehovah because he is reigning through the king. This doesn’t mean that the Jews ever saw the king as divine himself. I don’t believe they ever did. This is nonsense invented by modern scholars.

    Both at the birth and the resurrection the Son is begotten. Both the birth and the resurrection of Christ are instances of a new creation.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: