Discussion Questions

Chuck Pike frames the whole series as “prove beyond any reasonable doubt” from Old Testament prophecies that Jesus is the Son of God; what standards of evidence are you personally willing to accept or reject, and what does that reveal about what you’re actually asking God for? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Pike says the Old Testament proves Jesus is God’s Son “beyond reasonable doubt.” What kind of proof would you accept or reject, and what does that show about what you really want from God?

The lesson emphasizes that Jesus uniquely combines prophet, priest, and king—roles usually separated by tribe and office; what does this “three strands” picture suggest about God’s intention for leadership and mediation, and how does it confront modern preferences for a Jesus who is only “Savior” but not ruling King? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Jesus is shown as prophet, priest, and king all at once. What does that say about how God wants leadership to work, and how does it challenge people who want Jesus as Savior but not as King?

In Psalm 110, the Messiah is both seated at God’s right hand and declared “a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek”; how does the idea of an eternal priest-king reshape how you think about authority, intercession, and Jesus’ present reign—not just his past sacrifice? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Psalm 110 says the Messiah is both King at God’s right hand and a priest forever. How does that change how you think about Jesus’ authority and what he is doing right now, not just what he did on the cross?

The argument from Hebrews is that a change in priesthood was necessary to usher in a new covenant, with Jesus entering “heaven itself” with his own blood once-for-all; what assumptions do you think early Christians had about the seriousness of sin and atonement that many modern Christians resist? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Hebrews says the priesthood had to change for a new covenant, and Jesus offered his own blood once for all in heaven. What did early Christians seem to believe about how serious sin is that many Christians today push back against?

In Zechariah 3, “Joshua/Jesus the high priest” is opposed by Satan the accuser, stripped of filthy garments, reclothed, and connected to “the Branch,” “the stone with seven eyes,” and “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day”; which parts of that scene most unsettle you, and what picture of God’s cleansing and judgment is being presented? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In Zechariah 3, the high priest is accused by Satan, his dirty clothes are removed, and God says he will remove the land’s sin in one day. What part of that scene bothers you most, and what does it show about God’s cleansing and judgment?

Pike cites Lactantius claiming the “filthy clothes” represent Christ’s first coming “in the flesh,” and that after doing God’s will he receives dominion and judges God’s house; how does tying incarnation to “filthy garments” challenge modern instincts about comfort, honor, and what faithfulness looks like in a body that can suffer? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Lactantius says the “filthy clothes” point to Jesus coming “in the flesh” and suffering before receiving authority to judge. How does that idea challenge what you think faithfulness should look like in a body that can hurt?

Deuteronomy 18 is presented as a warning prophecy: God will “call to account” anyone who refuses the coming prophet, and Acts 3/7 intensify it (“cut off,” “utterly destroy”); how should that kind of divine warning shape the way Christians talk about Jesus publicly, especially in a culture that expects faith to be non-confrontational? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Deuteronomy 18 warns that God will judge people who refuse the coming prophet, and Acts makes the warning even stronger. How should warnings like that affect how Christians talk about Jesus in public in a culture that wants faith to stay polite and non-threatening?

Pike argues Deuteronomy 18 cannot point to a foreigner because the prophet must be “from among your fellow Israelites,” and then he stacks 20+ Moses–Jesus parallels from John and the Torah; which parallels struck you as strongest or weakest, and how would you test whether this is faithful interpretation or overreach? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Pike says Deuteronomy 18 must mean an Israelite prophet, and he lists many Moses–Jesus parallels. Which parallels seem strongest or weakest to you, and how would you check if this is good Bible reading or stretching it too far?

Stephen’s Acts 7 speech is described as “the sermon of the three complaints”—Israel rejected Joseph, rejected Moses, and then rejected/killed the Messiah; where do you see that same pattern of rejecting God’s chosen leadership showing up in church life today (including your own reactions to authority, correction, or unpopular truth)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Stephen says Israel rejected Joseph, rejected Moses, and then rejected and killed the Messiah. Where do you see that same kind of rejecting God’s leaders happening in churches today, including in how you respond to authority or correction?

Pike’s final three challenges include rejecting a “humanistic, watered-down gospel” focused on personal happiness and returning to “the gospel of the kingdom” preached in Acts; what specific parts of your current Christianity (habits, goals, teaching you consume, what you call “good news”) would have to change if you actually centered your life on Jesus as reigning King with a coming judgment? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Pike says we should reject a “watered-down gospel” about personal happiness and return to the “gospel of the kingdom.” If you truly lived with Jesus as reigning King who will judge, what would need to change in your habits, goals, and what you call “good news”?