Upvote:1
They would interpret it in light of the whole of the Scripture, with many many passages that together show that Jesus is God. They would not paraphrase this verse differently than it is written, because there is no need to do so. God chose it to be as it is, and it is not in conflict with Trinitarianism.
Upvote:5
And how exactly would you rather have him start ?
(Acts 2:22) Men of Israel, listen to this message: Jesus of Nazareth was a GOD certified by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs, which God did among you through Him, as you yourselves know.
Don't you recall what happened the last time around ?
(John 5:17-18) Jesus answered them: My Father works hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
(John 10:30-33) I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them: Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me ? The Jews answered him, saying: For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, make thyself God.
If even the simple sentences My Father works hitherto, and I work, or I and my Father are one could determine the Jewish audience to respond in such drastic ways, perhaps easing them into it would have been better than the alternative ? Just saying; after all, we all know how Christ's story ended, don't we ?
(Acts 2:23) This man was handed over to you by Godβs deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
As a general rule in life, when addressing any audience, it is usually recommended to start off with statements with whom most, if not all, are already in agreement.