A Changed God? (by David, a Guest Blogger)
July 11th, 2007 by Steve Sensenig
any of my readers will recognize frequent commenter “ded”. David is a very close friend and brother and one whom I am honored to have as a regular reader and commenter.
On several occasions, I have teasingly told David that he should get his own blog because his comments are often (in my opinion) more insightful than my posts. Finally, he has consented to write a guest post here.
So, without further ado, here is David’s post entitled “A Changed God?”
Do New and Old Testament revelations of God contradict? No. It is more a correlated function such as the two sets of sprockets in tandem of a multi-gear bicycle.Consider the basic, ten-speed bike. The forward larger sprockets are two levels for gearing the chain toward the rear set of five. The New Testament is the forward set and the Old is the rear.
The rider’s feet interact with the pedals connected only to the front sprockets. The believer is directly connected with New Testament revelation, as it is Jesus’ death and resurrection that connect us to the Father. Applying one’s will to the teachings of Jesus is like pressing the pedals creating torque in the gearing system.
The two front New Testament “sprockets” are the two great commandments: love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength; and love your neighbor as yourself. These two commandments are singled out by Jesus as a summation of Old Testament law or the five sprockets in the back which are the Pentateuch. Christian living based upon Jesus’ two great commandments fulfills all that is needed.
One rides a ten-speed understanding putting the feet on the pedals connected to the front sprockets. It is enough. The bicycle will move forward. As increased understanding of the rear sprocket will increase efficiency using the bicycle, increased understanding of the Old Testament improves insight and understanding into the New.
For example, Moses’ final words to the Israelites before Joshua leads them into the Promised Land include, “It is the Lord your God who will cross ahead of you; He will destroy these nations before you, and you shall dispossess them.” Deut. 31:3. God’s continuing interaction with the Israelites from the book of Joshua through the history books encompasses other directions and other contexts to destroy various groups in Canaan. Further, as Israel fails to respond to God, the blessing/cursing dichotomy also described in Deuteronomy plays out.
Passages of God’s attitudes and actions toward the Canaanites and toward the Israelites themselves are used by some as evidence that God is cruel and vindictive. Christians even question this Old Testament revelation in an attempt to reconcile God between His “contrasting” Old and New Testament characteristics.
I believe explanations which require reconciliation of Old and New Testament revelation stand on a false assumption that God changed. If the two revelations are seen as two connected pieces that turn each upon the other, a fuller meaning is revealed.
Case in point; consider the Israelites being instructed to kill Canaanites. The Lord had determined to have a covenant people who worshiped Him. Mixture between the Israelites and these people of false beliefs would have served to entice those of the covenant to join in false worship. Further, along with these false gods came some fairly abhorrent human behaviors, namely sacrificing live babies by fire before Molech and both male and female temple prostitutes available for sexual activity as part of the worship of Baal.
Consider Paul’s first letter to Corinthian Christians which instructs them to shun a person who purports being a Christian but insists he or she is free to practice sexual immorality. Notice the same separation of those who belong to God from those who are involved in idolatry expressed through sexual behavior.
God’s attitude of preventing mixture has not changed from the Old Testament to the New. The noticeable difference is the New Testament does not require immediate stoning or other violence leading to death as it did in Old Testament. Did God change? No.
It is the effect of the crucifixion and resurrection. It isn’t that God changed either His attitudes or His methods. His physical entry into the world in the form of Jesus and the satisfaction of His perfect justice through Christ’s atonement altered humanity’s condition.
That is, people are slaves to sin. Once sin becomes practice, humans will not turn from such. The Canaanites would not change, and the Israelites were drawn into those false beliefs.
God had no alternatives to the destruction of people groups mired in false worship or punishment of the Israelites for idolatry before Jesus walked on the earth and ended His life as sin under the curse of God. With the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus breaking the power of sin and death, the human condition was enabled to respond to the message of God’s grace and love. God remained unchanged.
The two sets of gears of the Old and New Testament are not in conflict but function in tandem. Each turns on the other. We pedal with the front set, the New Testament and its revelation. There is no call for moving the pedals to the rear set of sprockets of the Old Testament. The Old Testament provides insight into New Testament faith and practice.
Even without such insight, one can place faith in Jesus and be released to live out the two great commandments. The New Testament clearly demonstrates that those of faith are now a part of the new covenant of grace. We live from the New Testament which is in line with the Old. Both are a revelation of the one true God, our Father, who remains unchanged.
Many thanks to David for taking the time to write this post. And all may feel free to comment on it here.
Until next time,
steve 
Posted in Scripture Interpretation, Guest Blogger | 
Print This Post
|
Now, see, David, posts like these are why you need to start a blog.
I really enjoyed this.
Thanks, Gordon, I appreciate the encouragement. This is summer break, which allows me much time. Very unlike the regular school year.
Thanks for this post David,
I know I don’t comment over here, but I usually read all the posts and comments.
This is interesting and wrote where anyone can understand!
Blessings.
Ron.
Well written David. I can relate to the bicycle metaphors.
Ron,
Thanks for the comment. Blessings are returned!
Terry, I had the “Long Ride” in mind, and well, I was riding when the metaphor came together for me.
Good post! He remains the same….Love trumps…Amen!
David,
Perhaps Steve could allow you more space here at TM? I thoroughly enjoyed reading this post. It is nice to hear from you in this venue, though your comments are always good, too!
David,
Sorry for the double post. I wanted to run my question by Steve before I posed it to you in the thread, because I realize the potential volatility contained in it. Steve agreed that it was fair and I have his blessing to post it for discussion. I post it as I worded it to Steve in an email I sent him earlier today:
I have a thought perhaps you could expound a bit upon, one that has troubled me for some time. How do the OT genocides reconcile with an unchanging God? In 1 Samuel 15:1-3, God commands the Israelites to destroy the Amalekite nation, including the infants.
Then some of us who claim an inerrantist view of the Scriptures then say that God hates abortion, yet in the OT God commanded the murder of innocent babies and probably even pre-born. How do we reconcile that?
jadasgigi, Thanks for reading. I am glad you got something out of it.
Tony, likewise I am glad you enjoyed it. Regarding your second post…hmmmm.
This won’t be very satisfying, but I have a very full day today and am leaving town for a four day seminar tomorrow. I will not be able to give a thoughtful response until late next week. Just as well, because the expounding you asked for seems beyond my little nut of a thought factory at the moment.
;^)
Simple answer…
God is good and can be trusted. It requires some humility on our part to just live with the simple, even though such seems foolish to those who perish without the Cross. However, the Cross is an overwhelming picture of God’s love. I was forced to ponder the question, “Is it enough, or do I need more?” Once I faced the fear on which the question stood, I had to also admit my arrogance of expecting God to do more than sacrifice Jesus for me to be satisfied He was good, wise and full of care over humans. Only those who truly trust in the Cross and all it holds to satisfy our psychological/emotional needs can accept this simple answer.
However, we must still wrestle with the question you pose itself, in an effort to be prepared to answer for the hope within us. Some seek God with scales on their eyes and need our help to be reconciled to Him.
Steve, look! I used two html (or is it hmtl) tags at once.
David, I’m impressed at your growing HTML capabilities
All, It’s great to see this conversation taking place, and I really appreciate the time David has put into writing this post and responding to comments.
David, you’re welcome to create posts here anytime you desire. You have all the space you need here. And when you’re ready to get your own blog up and running, I’ll be sure to promote it here.
David,
Keep up with the blogging, either here or on your own. It is not hard to set up a blog, and it can be done for free. (what’s hard is finding time to write regularly–I used to do it in the early morning until my work hours changed, now I mostly write on weekends.) There are some in the blogosphere that are a waste of computer memory; we need more good thought out there.
Phil Hawkins
ded,
Nice post. I can realte heartily with the idea of needing more. Arrogance,yeah. I just finished reading The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe to my kids. My oldest, who is 7, said he felt like Peter. My 6 year old daughter said she liked Lucy. I can’t help but feel like Edmund. Even as I reread the words of C.S. Lewis, I feel a peace that all is well with my soul, even if my mind tries for the contrary.
Like The Chronicles of Narnia, your post has a simplicity that is a great encouragement, thanks!
I checked back to see if anything had been added to David’s post and ran into Tony’s question. In order to keep the water stirred in David’s absence I will add a thought or two.
Years ago I came across Roman’s 9. In it Paul states:
16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.”
18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”
20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
Verse 22 says it all and at the time I read it thought that it meant that those people (men, women and children) were allowed to populate the earth with an end in mind—destruction. They never would have existed had it not been for an example to us…brutal yes but understandable in an innocent kind of way.
We are His creation, His pottery and in the course of forming us, He had to throw some back (those prepared for destruction) into the sludge pot.
Not the final word but just a thought in passing.
ded,
I agree. Considering the harmony of the two is clearly the intention of God. The book Hebrews make this very clear in that the entire book is focused on glorifying Jesus and explaining the New Covenant, yet the entire book is based within quotes of the Old Testament.
So in an attempt to take the counsel of the Old in the light of the New the word against the Amalekites reveals? ,,,the reality of the wages of sin under law; under the blood of Jesus. So it is not merely this passage about the Amalekites in question but the Potter’s judgement of death upon sinful flesh. And therefore the question of God’s love toward the Amalakites is one so many hearts are asking, who will help me understand God’s love when the law of sin and death is at work in my flesh.
Phil and Mike,
Thanks for the encouragment. It is appreciated.
Terry,
Glad to see you commenting over here. I didn’t consider what you have suggested here. Perhaps with Romans 9:22 in mind, we might ask if God acted with much patience toward the Amelakites seeking their repentance before He acted against them; and it simply has not been recorded at God’s discretion.
Josiah,
How gratifying to return and find your comment following similar lines of thinking to mine as I pondered Tony’s question through the week. (For all Steve’s readers, allow me to recognize Josiah as my first born son, whom I love dearly!)
Tony,
I read the account in 1 Samuel from which your question about God killing babies is drawn. The word in the story line upon which my response hinges is punish.
1 Samuel 15:2 “Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘I will punish Amalek {for} what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt. God had a motivation and goal that was larger than and removed from a lust for death that included children. Was God fair or just in this? For many humans, perhaps not. However, as Christians, we cannot call God, God and somehow separate from His character His sovereignty. People do not like to think of God’s judgment. Yet, it is real and revealed in the NT as well as the Old.
Romans 11:20 Quite right, they the (Jews) were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off.
And, of course, the final White Throne judgment comes to mind. Judgment is a part of the whole story the Bible tells us. Because God’s judgment must be satisfied and all have fallen short of the holiness of God, for there is none good–not one–Jesus died. God’s judgment appears harsh until one puts it in light of the crucifixion. Then God’s goodness becomes significantly tied to His character of holiness. Yet, God is not a mixture of good and evil as in an Eastern, yin-yang view of the world. Holiness, or the reason for His judgment is not evil. It is not a counter balance of His character of love.
When one analyzes what is going on in the earth from an inside-the-bubble perspective only, it is possible to presume that any God who does exist is care-less and aloof toward humanity. People need to be able to explain the pain and suffering of this life. I have observed Christians often refer to what is going on in the earth as a battle between good and evil. No, this is incorrect as well; and I suggestis a statement formed by analyzing from within the bubble, also. There is not a battle between good and evil taking place on the earth. Such a view elevates Lucifer to an equal but malevolent player with God. From a biblical view or God’s eye view, we step back and look into the bubble. From this angle, we see a rebellion standing on pride and selfishness by the creation against its Creator is the true scenario. The OT/NT harmony and message is consistent and God is holy and good in all His decisions when we view Him properly as the One who has been violated by our rebellious sin!
So how do we take a stand against abortion? Well, humans aborting babies is a death of innocents to serve our convenience or often to support our sexual misbehavior. It cannot be qualified as righteousness opposing the proud and sinful which, in context, is what God authorized in 1 Samuel.
1.Thanks for the instructive analogy. It’ll take me awahile to process it. Meanwhile, here’s another one along the same lines, since God’s revelation to man is multifaceted and multilayered:
21 speed bike. Front three sprockets=Trinity
Back seven sprockets= seven (types of) churches.
I’ll leave the types of churches up to your imagination, but perhaps they could include something like this…Catholic…to…house church…to…evertything in between and beyond.
2.I was just reading today about the Aztecs and their human sacrifices. I suppose it’s a good thing that Cortes came over from Spain and conquered them. Maybe that’s a little like Joshua and the Caananites?
3. I admit that I am struggling with the Old/New Testament reconciliation dilemma. But your wisdom, David, has helped me to achieve a deeper understanding. The bike analogy helped. A little like a modern parable. Keep it up.
4. And thanks, Steve, for hosting this.
Carey
Carey,
In your Cortes application of the idea that God’s judgment may be accomplished by one country’s army against a sinning people group, I cannot concur.
Certainly I made a case that God’s righteous judgment in the OT is not cruelty as I looked at the history of the Hebrews in Canaan. However, the second point I was trying to make is that the crucifixion changed the need for God to interact with humans in such a way. Thereby, Cortes would have only been in line with what God is doing since Jesus by being an ambassador of reconciliation to the Aztecs of God’s love and forgiveness manifest in the Christ. I think Cortez should have called them to repentance from their human sacrifices without applying the sword.
It is Jesus and Him crucified that changes those who represent the Most High from being agents of God’s holy judgment to those who bring the love of God. It is a distinction lost on many Christians in this day and age, who attempt to mix OT and NT revelation into a composite of commandments for living. Such cannot work, since it negates the finished work of Jesus on the cross.
[…] eaders of my blog are no doubt familiar with “ded”, a frequent and insightful commenter. On one occasion back in July of this year, he even guest-blogged here. […]