[keypurr]

Originally Posted by Pierac

EBIONISM (Adoptionism). The earliest and most radical denial of the deity of Christ, Ebionism was taught by a small Jewish-Christian sect in the 1st century. They believed that the power of God came upon a man named Jesus to enable him to fulfill the Messianic role, but that Christ was not God.


Was Peter a EBIONITE?

Mat 16:15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Mat 16:16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Wow, not God! What else did Peter say or teach?

Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--

WOW Acts 2:22 sure fits the bill for... "believed that the power of God came upon a man named Jesus to enable him to fulfill the Messianic role"

"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has caused us to be born-again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).


I'd have to go with Peter was a EBIONITE with a little Luke virgin birth added for flavor!

Luk 1:35 The angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.



Paul

Oh Paul, there you go sinking their ship with truth.

Will they ever learn?

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by Pierac

Was Peter a EBIONITE?

No.

Mat 16:15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Mat 16:16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Wow, not God! What else did Peter say or teach?

Here you've engaged in a Non Sequitur Fallacy. The text simply does not say that Jesus is "not God," nor does its reference to Jesus as "the Son of God" indicate that he was not, in fact, God Incarnate. In fact, it demonstrates precisely the reverse.

Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--

WOW Acts 2:22 sure fits the bill for... "believed that the power of God came upon a man named Jesus to enable him to fulfill the Messianic role"

"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has caused us to be born-again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).

I'd have to go with Peter was a EBIONITE with a little Luke virgin birth added for flavor!

Luk 1:35 The angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.Paul

Nice try. Unfortunately for your assumptions, however, these carefully selected---and badly misapplied---texts aren't the only verses in the Bible that address the question of the natures of Jesus Christ. Your opinion fails to account for ALL of the Christological data in the scriptures. In short, you forgot all of these. That's why Adoptionism was formally defined as a doctrinal heresy by the early Christian Church, and why faithful Christians have rejected it down to our own day.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by keypurr

Oh Paul, there you go sinking their ship with truth. Will they ever learn?

Already answered---and refuted---in Post #92 above. (Remove foot from mouth.)



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+