Search across the entire library, lesson transcripts, Bible verses, and more.

Press / or Ctrl+K to open search anytime.

Select content types to search:

📜 Library Paragraphs from theological writings 🎧 Lessons Course transcript segments with timestamps 📖 Bible Bible verses (KJV) 📺 YouTube Videos Video titles, descriptions, and transcript moments 📝 Blog Posts Articles and blog content

Jumpstarter 8 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

All Questions

Question 8

Pike notes the early Christians didn’t start their case for Christ’s divinity with John 1 but with Old Testament appearances; what does that suggest about their apologetic instincts and view of continuity between Testaments, and how would that differ from common modern evangelical ways of defending Jesus’ divinity?

Another way to ask: Pike says early Christians argued for Jesus’ divinity using Old Testament appearances, not starting with John 1. What does that show about how they defended their faith, and how is that different from how many evangelicals do it today?

Direct Answer It suggests the early Christians instinctively defended Christ’s divinity by showing continuity across the whole Bible—especially Moses and the Old Testament “appearances”—whereas Pike implies many today start mainly with explicit New Testament proof texts like John 1.

Support from Transcript:

Pike says early Christians used OT events “to prove the divinity of the Son of God.”
He emphasizes their starting point: “they didn’t start with John chapter 1. They started with all these passages in the Old Testament.”
Their argument is coherence-based: OT stories “make no sense… that there must be another who is referred to as God… the Word of God.”
Pike notes they pressed Jews with the logic: if God “fills all things” and is “unapproachable light,” OT encounters “cannot possibly be the Father.”
He connects Genesis 18’s title “judge of all the earth” with Christ: “Christ… is the judge of the living and the dead,” showing their cross-Testament linkage.

Discussion Follow-ups How would your confidence change if your Christology rested not only on John 1 but also on Genesis, Exodus, and the prophets? What might be gained—or risked—by arguing from narrative theophanies rather than only from direct doctrinal statements?

Jumpstarter 8 of 10