Through the classes I teach at Grace, a common question that people ask is about the portrait of God as found in the Old Testament. The struggle is that there seems to be a different portrait of God in the OT as we find in the New Testament (Christian Scriptures). Thus, people question if there are really two gods or if God changed in character from the portait in the OT to the God we know through the ministry of Jesus Christ and his followers.
A man in the early 2nd century of the Common Era (A.D.) named Marcion was one of the first who “rejected the idea that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God were the same being” (see Chris Price per Peter Kirby’s blog). This perspective has indeed continued to the present day, in spite of the dominant perspective of the church arguing for the continuity of God in the Bible. But then how do we then make sense of the varied portaits?
Negative Aspects of God perceived in the OT:
- Vengeful – if someone sees God, if someone touches the Ark of the Covenant, when the people of God create an idol at the foot of Mount Sinai, etc.
- Seeking destruction and dispossession of peoples and property in the land of promise (see Deut. 12:29; Josh 6:21).
- Many others: Destroying Sodom & Gomorrah, Holy Wars, the Flood, etc.
There are likely many options to argue how God is the God found in the OT and the NT:
Option 1: The lens to see reality and worldview of a particular people is limited, and thus in the OT the people describe God given their current culture and lens. The portait of God (and God’s request for actions) is biased by the limitations of the people at that time. This option argues that there is a distinction between the character of God and the character of God as perceived by the people in a particular time and place. Thus, when we come to the NT, the character of God has not changed, rather the perception of God is presented by a people in a different time with different areas of focus.
Option 2: The portait of God in the OT is balanced by many other attributes (merciful, slow to anger, abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, seeking to bless all peoples, the God of all creation, etc.), which are not embraced in the same way the more negative aspects are, giving a limited portait of God in the OT. This often happens when people are alarmed by what God says or does, but the totality of God’s character is not kept in view.
Option 3: Another understanding argues that the understanding of God changed as the people of God developed (matured), as in developmental psychology. The way of relating to the early tribes of Israel and people of the Exodus was more reflective of a parent and a younger child – more blunt, declarative, etc. Then when the people of God mature, the way God relates to God’s children was more reflective of a parent and a child moving into adulthood, needing to take more responsibility and see the basis of their actions. (There is a risk in assuming that the early children of God are immature, while the people in the NT reflect mature children – this is especially risky when we project Jews (of today and throught history) as immature, while Christians as the more mature ones. I disagree and want to guard against such ideas).
Questions for Reflection: What do you think? What perspectives do you hold? How do you understand the character of God as found in the OT? How does this shape your ways of reading Scripture?

The General Conference of the
In 2005 Shelly and I visited the UN and we saw this chart on the wall (graphic), visually describing how the world spends its resources. As you may be able to see, most of the money goes towards Military. In 2004 that figure was about $1 Trillion; it has only grown since then. 



