• Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Why does God seem so different in the OT than in the NT

Member
I was told to just read the NT and not even worry about reading the OT. I've read a little of the OT and find God to be quite intimidating. Very different than Jesus in the NT. It's almost like they're completely different. Why is this? I know it was different eras, but God is unchanging. However, there's definitely a change in mood between the two testaments.
 
Last edited:
Active
Happy Soul,you are correct!! We understand in the O.T. the children of Isreal were under the Law!! They had to be!! They were such a rebelious people,espicaly to idols!! They were what Jesus called them in the New Testament before Jesus freed us ALL!! slaves!!( john 8:31-42) one of many examples.God has always loved his people,but his people have problems in loving him.Even today,many who call themselves believers live like the world!! Or!! are slaves to the world, because they will not be doers of the Word and remain only hearers of the Word,of course decieving themselve. James 1:22 It is not God who has changed,for as you said God does not!!In the Old Testament God says I change not!! Mal3:6 and in the New Hebrews13:8 Jesus Christ the same!! But his people are the ones who have changed,many have stoped believeing in him,his love is everlasting,but so even as our wonderful God is so loving!! He has another side to him, God is also Fair and just!! It is this side most never talk about,but it is this side that make us do what Jesus tells us to do everyday!! Examine oneself to see if you be in the faith!!(2 Cor 13:5) hope this helps.blessing to you,and good point as well!
 
Active

RJ

I was told to just read the NT and not even worry about reading the OT. I've read a little of the OT and find God to be quite intimidating. Very different than Jesus in the NT. It's almost like they're completely different. Why is this? I know it was different eras, but God is unchanging. However, there's definitely a change in mood between the two testaments.

Hebrews 8
The High Priest of a New Covenant
1 Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by a mere human being.

3 Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4 If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already priests who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. 5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”[a] 6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.

7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said:

“The days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 No longer will they teach their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”[c]

13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

The difference in the Old and New Testament and God's relationship to man is the difference between the Old Covenant of the Law and the New Covenant of love and grace.

While Jesus was alive and very much still under the Old Covenant of his farther, he told his disciples that to forgive one another or their God in heaven would not forgive them.
After his resurrection, the Bible says to forgive one another as your father in heaven has forgiven you.
Two completely different explanations of love, the first under the Law and a mandate, the latter not a requirement for salvation but and expression of love under God's Grace.

Because of Jesus Christ and the finality of the cross and his resurrection, God is not at war with man anymore, he is not even mad!
 
Member
I would say that there is no difference between the 'O.T.' and the 'N.T.'. It's simply the understanding of man which changed. Throughout the 'O.T.' it's easy to see God's plan and intentions. It was just that those who were supposed to be His rebelled.
 
Member
I was told to just read the NT and not even worry about reading the OT. I've read a little of the OT and find God to be quite intimidating. Very different than Jesus in the NT. It's almost like they're completely different. Why is this? I know it was different eras, but God is unchanging. However, there's definitely a change in mood between the two testaments.

The apostle Paul wrote: "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work."(2 Tim 3:16, 17) This is in harmony with with Jesus words to Cleopas and his friend after his resurrection: "O senseless ones and slow in heart to believe on all the things the prophets spoke ! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into his glory ?"(Luke 24:25, 26) Luke 24:27 now says that "commencing at Moses and all the Prophets (Jesus) interpreted ("interpret", Greek diemeneuo, meaning to "explain thoroughly", Strong's # G1329) to them things pertaining to himself in all the Scriptures."

In order to understand the Bible of 66 books(and Jesus role in the outworking of God's everlasting purpose toward the earth), the Hebrew Scriptures (commonly called the Old Testament) must be thoroughly examined along with the Christian Greek Scriptures (commonly called the New Testament).

The Bible is one complete book, not two "testaments" as the churches would have one believe. Without understanding the Hebrew Scriptures, a person cannot begin to grasp the meaning of the Christian Greek Scriptures. They are interlocked as "one", for they have but one author, Jehovah God.

Concerning God, James, the half-brother of Jesus, wrote: "Every good gift and every perfect present is from above, for it comes down from the Father of the [celestial] lights, and with him there is not a variation of the turning of the shadow."(James 1:17) Hence, our Creator has never changed his moral standards, boundaries, nor his righteousness. Yet some feel that the "God of the Old Testament is harsh whereas the God of the New Testament is loving." Why ?

Simply because these cannot seemingly grasp or appreciate God's righteousness. The Bible describes the Creator as “a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in loving-kindness and truth, preserving loving-kindness for thousands, pardoning error and transgression and sin.” (Exodus 34:6, 7)

The expression “loving-kindness” (Hebrew kheh'-sed) translates a very meaningful Hebrew word. It denotes a kindness that lovingly attaches itself to an object until its purpose for that object is realized. It can also be translated “loyal love.” Jehovah’s kindness lovingly attaches itself to his creatures and accomplishes his wonderful purpose.

However, God's righteousness requires that justice be served at the appropriate time, for Exodus 34:7 continues saying that "by no means will he give exemption from punishment, bringing punishment for the error of fathers upon sons and upon grandsons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation.” Jehovah God cannot turn his back upon that which is unjust, and at his appointed time, he removes that which is wrong.

The land of Canaan, the land promised to Abraham's descendants, was a land inhabited by Canaan's (grandson of Noah through his son Ham and who committed a perverted sexual act upon his grandfather when Noah was unintentionally drunk -Gen 9:20-26) descendants. These practiced sexual and other perversions, taking up the demented desires of their forefather, Canaan.

For example, Abraham told his servant Eliezer concerning a wife for his son Isaac: "Put your hand, please, under my thigh, as I must have you swear by Jehovah, the God of the heavens and the God of the earth, that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Ca′naan·ites in among whom I am dwelling, but you will go to my country and to my relatives, and you will certainly take a wife for my son, for Isaac.”(Gen 24:2-4) Isaac also told his son Jacob: "You must not take a wife from the daughters of Ca′naan," but to "take yourself a wife from the daughters of La′ban the brother of your mother." Why ?

The population of the land of Canaan, as a whole, practiced immoral and wicked conduct. During the centuries that followed, the land of Canaan became saturated with detestable practices of idolatry, immorality, and bloodshed. The Canaanite religion was extraordinarily base and degraded, their “sacred poles” evidently being phallic symbols, and many of the rites at their “high places” involving gross sexual excesses and depravity. (Ex 23:24; 34:12, 13; Num 33:52; De 7:5)

Incest, sodomy, and bestiality were part of ‘the way of the land of Canaan’ that made the land unclean and for which error it was due to “vomit its inhabitants out.” (Lev 18:2-25) Magic, spellbinding, spiritism, and sacrifice of their children by fire were also among the Canaanites’ detestable practices.(Deut 18:9-12)

Added to their other degrading practices was that of child sacrifice. According to Merrill F. Unger: “Excavations in Palestine have uncovered piles of ashes and remains of infant skeletons in cemeteries around heathen altars, pointing to the widespread practice of this cruel abomination.” (Archaeology and the Old Testament, 1964, p. 279)

Halley’s Bible Handbook
(1964, p. 161) says: “Canaanites worshipped, by immoral indulgence, as a religious rite, in the presence of their gods; and then, by murdering their first-born children, as a sacrifice to these same gods. It seems that, in large measure, the land of Canaan had become a sort of Sodom and Gomorrah on a national scale. . . . Did a civilization of such abominable filth and brutality have any right longer to exist? . . . Archaeologists who dig in the ruins of Canaanite cities wonder that God did not destroy them sooner than he did."(Vol. 1, p. 739)

For the protection of his people, the Israelites, Jehovah God had them removed from the land by force. Just as a loving father will see that his family is protected from unclean practices, so likewise does God, but even more so. Just before the Israelites entered the land of Canaan in 1473 B.C.E., Moses told them that "it is for the wickedness of these nations that Jehovah is driving them away from before you."(Deut 9:4)

Therefore, Jehovah God told the nation of Israel that "little by little I shall drive them out from before you, until you become fruitful and really take possession of the land."(Ex 23:30) As David said at Psalms 9:8, that Jehovah God will "himself will judge the productive land in righteousness; He will judicially try national groups in uprightness." Hence, his removal of the Canaanites by means of the nation of Israel (which they did not completely fulfill) was because of his judging "the productive land (of Canaan) in righteousness." Therefore God has not changed, for he has an appointed time to remove all wickedness soon from the entire earth, at "the war of the great day of God the Almighty...Armageddon."(Rev 16:14, 16)
 
Active

RJ

I would say that there is no difference between the 'O.T.' and the 'N.T.'. It's simply the understanding of man which changed. Throughout the 'O.T.' it's easy to see God's plan and intentions. It was just that those who were supposed to be His rebelled.

With all due respect to your current beliefs, I will have to disagree.
There is a stark difference between the Old and New, so much so that God said that the New abolishes the Old. Salvation in the Old was from the Law, the law of requirements and salvation in the New is from Grace; God calls it a gift and if it is a gift, it is free and carries no requirements but faith in what God offers. There are many examples in the Bible, this is just one:


In the Old Testament and God's covenant with man, a violation of the covenant requirement could end in death:

Leviticus 24:16 (New International Version, ©2010)

16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death.

The very same violation in the New Covenant would not end in death and even would be forgiven:

Luke 12:10 (New International Version, ©2010)

10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

It is a given that God's love for man never changed but His relationships and requirements of man has very much changed!
 
Member
God was still intimidating in the NT. When Ananias and Sapphira lied to God, He killed them immediately. And it made everyone, even outside of the Church, terribly afraid. God is still operating the same exact way today, except we don't seem to recognize it as God.
 
Active

RJ

God was still intimidating in the NT. When Ananias and Sapphira lied to God, He killed them immediately. And it made everyone, even outside of the Church, terribly afraid. God is still operating the same exact way today, except we don't seem to recognize it as God.

You will find your story in Acts 5. Acts is considered an historical document and not meant to be viewed as doctrine. Ananias and Sapphira, in there on minds, were very much under the Law and had no concept of God's New Covenant Grace through Jesus Christ. Also,dying from fear perhaps, but there is no record that "God killed them", they both just simply dropped dead.

If this act, in fact, happened after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the New Covenant (Promise, Contract) between God and man was in force. For that alone, God would not have punished them by killing them, their fate would come on judgement day.
 
Member
I was told to just read the NT and not even worry about reading the OT. I've read a little of the OT and find God to be quite intimidating. Very different than Jesus in the NT. It's almost like they're completely different. Why is this? I know it was different eras, but God is unchanging. However, there's definitely a change in mood between the two testaments.

My freind, one should indeed study the Old Testament but only after one has an understanding of the New. The New Testament was primarily composed of the Gospels which are Christ ministering to the Jews the lost and finally going top the cross. It was at the cross the Old was fulfilled and out of that act (along with the subsequent resurrection) that the church was born- this is chronicled in the Book of Acts. What follows the Book of Acts are the Epistles which are God's instructions (a love letter) written primarily for born again (New Covenant) believers.
It is only after we are rooted and grounded in the doctrines given through the Holy Spirit (those same Epistles) that we may read the Old Testament with any real understanding. One who understands the nature Of who Jesus Christ is and what He did for them can plainly see Christ, his ministry and the plan of salvation plainly woven throughout the entire Old Covenant.
 
Member
You will find your story in Acts 5. Acts is considered an historical document and not meant to be viewed as doctrine. Ananias and Sapphira, in there on minds, were very much under the Law and had no concept of God's New Covenant Grace through Jesus Christ. Also,dying from fear perhaps, but there is no record that "God killed them", they both just simply dropped dead.

Are you serious!? Acts shouldn't be taken as doctrine!? I suppose that we should simply read the gospels as history to and not get any doctrine from it. why not, I mean one was written by Luke as a historical account. I guess we shouldn't try to get any doctrine out of the Pentateuch either. And I cant believe that you think that God didn't kill Ananias and Sapphira. If you read the story, it is plain as day that it was God who killed them. If it wasn't God that killed them, then how did Peter know that Sapphira was going to die too?
 
Active

RJ

Are you serious!? Acts shouldn't be taken as doctrine!? I suppose that we should simply read the gospels as history to and not get any doctrine from it. why not, I mean one was written by Luke as a historical account. I guess we shouldn't try to get any doctrine out of the Pentateuch either. And I cant believe that you think that God didn't kill Ananias and Sapphira. If you read the story, it is plain as day that it was God who killed them. If it wasn't God that killed them, then how did Peter know that Sapphira was going to die too?

O.K., O.K., keep your shirt on cman, no need getting upset over this!
You can not compare Acts to the Gospels; Luke did his doctrinal work there.
Basic to understanding Acts is an understanding of Luke's purpose in writing the book of Acts. He states that purpose in the opening lines of the book: it is to set forth the continuation of the ministry of Christ after His resurrection and ascension; that is, His ministry through His apostles (hence the designation, "Acts of the Apostles"). He wrote to document the spread of the apostolic church from Jerusalem to the "uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8). His purpose, then, was not doctrinal but historical, which explains his failure to explain the differences which arise in the "pattern" of the book. His purpose directed his style.

Please show me where the story is written and where it is plain as day says that God killed them.
 
Member
well the fact that Peter knew that they were both going to die for lying is the first thing. second is that Peter said that they were testing the Spirit of the LORD, and then they died. And then there is the fact that every historical interpretation of the passage says that it was God who killed them. And all of scripture should be used for doctrine (within context) 2 Timothy 3:16
 
Active
Acts 5:3 But Peter said"Ananis why has Satan!! filled your heart to LIE TO the Holy Spirit AND to keep back some of the price of the Land? please continue to read on from here.verse 4!! YOU have NOt lied unto men!! BUT!! TO GOD!! verse 5 ah he fell dead! Pentecost came way before this acts 2:4 now please go to acts 2:39 they were not under the law! I have no idea where you can come up with he died from fear? oh well,hope this helps!
 
Active

RJ

well the fact that Peter knew that they were both going to die for lying is the first thing. second is that Peter said that they were testing the Spirit of the LORD, and then they died. And then there is the fact that every historical interpretation of the passage says that it was God who killed them. And all of scripture should be used for doctrine (within context) 2 Timothy 3:16

I guess we will have to just leave it at that exercise the commonly used " We can agree that we disagree" and then agree that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Lord of Lords and the King of Kings and without him we wouldn't have a clue, much less eternal life, Amen!
 
Member
Just don't lose sight of the fact that God was and still is a God of love and a God of Wrath and judgment.
 
Active

RJ

Acts 5:3 But Peter said"Ananis why has Satan!! filled your heart to LIE TO the Holy Spirit AND to keep back some of the price of the Land? please continue to read on from here.verse 4!! YOU have NOt lied unto men!! BUT!! TO GOD!! verse 5 ah he fell dead! Pentecost came way before this acts 2:4 now please go to acts 2:39 they were not under the law! I have no idea where you can come up with he died from fear? oh well,hope this helps!

If I said he died or meant to say that he died of causes other than God striking him down!
 
Active

RJ

Just don't lose sight of the fact that God was and still is a God of love and a God of Wrath and judgment.

I have not lost sight of him being the God of love. And I certainly have a different view, especially when God tells us that he abolished the Old Covenant for a better one in the New Covenant and that he will not look at our sin again....Our....Christians, for there is no condemnation for those in Jesus Christ! What can't you understand about that?? His relationship with us now is not a relationship of condemnation and wrath. Oh, he will dole out wrath upon the non-believer at the end of time but for the Christian the war is over!

If you being a Christian, want to believe that God will pour out his wrath on you, then I feel sorry for that kind of thinking and not what I understand about his new contract with us!!!

But again, hopefully we can agree that Jesus Christ is the King of Kings and our only salvation!
 
Last edited:
Loyal
Some of the posts in this thread sound as though the underlying understanding of God's plan of redemption is something like...

... When man sinned and all creation fell away from God, God set up a system of covenant law by which people could earn their own salvation. Over hundreds of years, people proved so disobedient and rebellious that God abandoned this system and began something completely different: a covenant of grace.

I am not saying that anybody writing on this thread would actually sign up to this, but a lot of people do believe something like this without really thinking about it.

First, righteousness before God in both the Old and New Covenants is by God's grace. Look at the story of Abraham: God calls him to be blessed and to be a blessing (Gen 12); then in Genesis 15.6 we read that it Abraham's righteousness was due to his faith.

Second, the law was a gift of grace. It was a means by which the people of God could live in a right relationship with God and with each other. There is no hint anywhere in the whole of the Old Testament that obedience to the Law earned righteousness before God. Quite a bit of the New Testament sounds critical of the Law, but this is because 1) it was understood and applied wrongly by many people 2) Jesus fulfilled the law and brought something far better.

The OP asks about the difference in God between the Old and the New Testaments. There is a difference. God reveals more of his plan of salvation, and more of himself as the Old Testament unfolds. What begins as a hint of God's intention in Genesis blossoms throughout the Old Testament until the big - and perfect - surprise: God sends his own Son.

I firmly believe that God is the same from the first word of Genesis to the last of Revelation, and that his plan to restore us to himself has been the same too.
 
Member
I have not lost sight of him being the God of love. And I certainly have a different view, especially when God tells us that he abolished the Old Covenant for a better one in the New Covenant and that he will not look at our sin again....Our....Christians, for there is no condemnation for those in Jesus Christ! What can't you understand about that?? His relationship with us now is not a relationship of condemnation and wrath. Oh, he will dole out wrath upon the non-believer at the end of time but for the Christian the war is over! If you being a Christian, want to believe that God will pour out his wrath on you, then I feel sorry for that kind of thinking and not what I understand about his new contract with us!!!


We are not talking about Christians right now, we are talking about Ananias and Sapphira. And Jesus came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it. This does not mean that we can live outside of God's Law. if we do claim to be Christians but live outside His Law, then he will tell us "depart from me I never knew you, you who practice lawlessness. and as far as Ananias and Sapphira not being punished until judgment day, what makes you think that God no longer punishes evil doers on earth? he did it in the old testament, so why would he not be doing it today. the covenant between Christ and the Church has nothing to do with it. this all comes back to the original point of the post. Is God the same today as he was five thousand years ago? of course he is. with that in mind there is no reason to assume that he is dealing any differently with evil people today.
 
Active

RJ

We are not talking about Christians right now, we are talking about Ananias and Sapphira. And Jesus came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it. This does not mean that we can live outside of God's Law. if we do claim to be Christians but live outside His Law, then he will tell us "depart from me I never knew you, you who practice lawlessness. and as far as Ananias and Sapphira not being punished until judgment day, what makes you think that God no longer punishes evil doers on earth? he did it in the old testament, so why would he not be doing it today. the covenant between Christ and the Church has nothing to do with it. this all comes back to the original point of the post. Is God the same today as he was five thousand years ago? of course he is. with that in mind there is no reason to assume that he is dealing any differently with evil people today.

Yes, yes, yes, God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, but that has nothing to do with his relationship with man, especially with regards to the New Covenant.

Let's move on to more mature things as Paul would say, what do you think the New Covenant is as compared to the Old Covenant?
 
Top