Is Jesus the God of the Old Testament?

Faith & Science Conversation
87

Two statements you made bother me, Roger. They put us at fundamental odds.

This kind of language simply does not work for me. This your sentence simply indicates to me you are putting yourself above scripture, and judging scripture on the basis of whether you think it ought to have been in there or not. Or whether scripture is simply a compilation of man-made “self-serving” stories. How can you judge as to whether “that really did not belong”? That is a very troubling statement to make. When you make it, you break trust with those who accept and trust scripture. It makes the discussion of scripture and scriptural authority on any topic simply impossible.

88

@johnZ wrote:

After I had written this:

> Does the revelation of God found in the story of Noah correspond to the revelation of God found in the rest of the Bible and in particular with that of Jesus Christ? That is a question you need to answer for yourself.*

This indicates that I do not put myself over scripture. Also he should know that the Bible is not the Word of God, Jesus Christ is the Word of God (John 1:1), which means that Jesus is over the Bible and particularly the OT. When we commit ourselves to Jesus Christ, we commit ourselves to put Jesus first in our lives, and nothing else, even the Bible and in particular the OT can come close.

My commitment is to God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. If one says that he or she accepts whatever scripture says without question, then there is really no commitment to understanding God and the revelation of Jesus Christ.

89

How would you judge the heart of someone in this way? Where did Jesus or His Father ever say such a thing? Did not Jesus himself say that anyone who removed even one little bit of the Torah would be judged least in the kingdom? Does scripture itself not say that all (ALL) scripture is profitable for reproof and doctrine? Where does the revelation of Jesus Christ come from? How do you know you understand it, if not from scripture itself?

1 Like
90

@johnZ wrote:

John, you quote Jesus as saying that the whole of the Torah is in force. However Paul was clear that the new covenant replaced the old covenant and forbid Christians from circumcising Gentiles. Circumcision was the sign of the old covenant given to Abraham before the Ten Commandments. Was Paul wrong? How do you reconcile these two parts of the NT.

Of course Jesus did change the Torah. He said it was alright to “work” on the Sabbath, if it is good work. Jesus forgave the woman caught in the act of adultery instead of having her stoned to death under the law.

Christians uphold very few rules of the Torah. Are you the exception? Are you starting a new sect or what? If not, why not?

92

You did not answer whether it is right to judge someone’s committment, if they accept scripture without question?

Actually Roger, you interpolated too much from my quote and to my application of this quote. Jesus said nothing should be removed. But as you said, he forgave the woman, and he forgave Peter for denying him, and he said it was lawful to do good on the sabbath. (The sabbath was a gift for man; man was not created for the sabbath.) Jesus said it was wrong to give money to the temple (church) at the expense of honoring your parents. Jesus said he fulfilled the law. In that aspect, Jesus clearly meant (as later verified by the apostles), that the ceremonial aspects of the law were done, finished, complete… this refers to all the aspects that substituted for Christ, or pointed directly to Christ.

I think your statement about circumcision is too absolute… Paul did not say that the new covenant forbade Christians from circumcising gentiles, but rather that circumcision was not mandatory, a subtle but important difference. Gentiles did not have to become Jews in order to be Christians. However, there was also no law against them agreeing to circumcision… in this case freedom to decide was desired.

The Torah is much more than just rules. It includes the history of Israel, creation, flood, Abraham’s faith, Egyptian slavery, exodus, dessert travel, and conquering of Canaan. It also includes the laws for living, such as ten commandments, laws about sexual morality, treatment of neighbors, property, honest weights, slaves/servants, etc. It also includes a number of rules about feasts and remembrances, sacrifices to be offered, putting sins on the goat, temple worship, holy of holies, priestly garments, tabernacle, ark (don’t touch), clean and unclean foods and unclean people, … and then, it also includes a bunch of rules about punishments for offences.

Jesus changed the punishments, without changing the laws of living. Jesus forgave the woman, not merely ignored or tolerated her sin. Forgiveness is a deliberate recognition of sin, and recognition of the need for repentance, which is why Jesus said to go and sin no more. Jesus changed the punishments because Christ himself took on our punishment. But, Jesus often indicated that sin would be punished as well, and those who lived in sin, would live and die in their punishment. Then we have this confirmed when Annanias and Sapphira had to pay for their disobedience with their lives. (which I believe was a deliberate God-given sign to the church.)

So, as you previously said that you follow Jesus, you must therefore follow this statement of Jesus as well, not to remove anything from the law. But you must also understand it the way that Jesus explained it, not just in some way that you might imagine he would be more consistent regardless of what he has said about it.

And remember, Roger, that All of scripture is profitable for reproof and doctrine, not just some preferred and select parts of scripture. All of scripture reveals God to us, and leads us to Christ, and reveals our own inadequacies, but also reveals God’s mercy and our renewal. Have a good day.

93

Very true, but in all of my years in the church I have never heard a preacher preach on the Curse of Canaan. Have you? Clearly there are some parts of scripture that are more meaningful than others. The problem with what you are advocating is that it is not true that all parts of scripture have equal authority. Some are clearly more important, truer than others. The NT has more authority than the Old.

Forgive me for this oversight. It should be seek evident that if one’s first commitment is to the Bible, then one’s first commitment is not to Jesus Christ. As Jesus said, “You cannot serve two Masters.” He was not talking about the Bible and God, but the principle still holds.

I have noticed that Ken Ham calls the Bible the Word of God, thus giving it the title that the Bible gives to Jesus Christ, thus confusing the Bible and the Second Person of the Trinity. In my discussions with conservative Christians, including our friend Eddie, I find that this confusion is real.

The Bible is about Jesus, but the Bible is not Jesus. Jesus is God, the Bible is not. Jesus is Perfect without sin, while the Bible is not without fault. Only Jesus is worthy of our total commitment, the Bible is not.

John uses the Word Logos for Jesus, not Logos. Logos is God’s rational Word, not God’s unquestioned word. This not a question of doubt, but a question of understanding. If people do not ask questions they do not learn. Job learned about YHWH and faith by asking questions, and his faith was accepted by YHWH, while the unquestioning faith of his friends was not.

**> Galatians 5:1-6 (ESV)

1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.
3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.
4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.
5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness.
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.**

If you really believe in the Bible, then you should accept and understand what the Bible says, and that is Christians must live by faith in Jesus Christ and nothing else. This is what Paul is saying in Galatians. Circumcision represents the Law in any form. When you and Eddie say that Christians must live by the Ten Commandments, you are saying that we must live by the Mosaic Covenant, which means that we lose salvation through the New Covenant in Jesus Christ according to the Bible.

94

Roger, you are switching topics, and still interpolating incorrectly from what I have said. You seem to be “reading in” into my comments, rather than “reading from” my comments. When you make absolute statements such as " you are advocating that all parts of scripture have equal authority", you need to ask yourself is that really what he said. Is this exactly opposite to saying that some parts of scripture are more meaningful than others?

I believe all parts of scripture are true. But this does not mean that all have the same impact. And “meaningful” is subjective; in other words, it has nothing to do with the truth of scripture, but rather is different for different people. Yes, I have heard the curse of canaan mentioned and explained in a sermon many years ago, but I agree that in our north american context, it is not so significant. Yet, it is as significant as all the other punishments meted out to Moses, Israel, David, Cain, Ahab, Jereboam.

The New Testament does not have any less authority than the old. To put one against the other just entirely misses the point of the revelation of God, of who God is, of who Jesus is, and why God sent Jesus to us through the people of Israel. Without the old testament, the new testament is detached, is incomplete, and has much less meaning. But perhaps you should define what you mean by “authority”.

Of course our first committment is to Jesus. But I don’t remember discussing “first committment”. My first family committment is to my wife; that does not somehow make my committment to my children or my parents less significant. In the same way, our first committment to Christ does not reduce our committment to scripture. Especially since it is scripture which has revealed Christ to us.

Your confusion about the “Word” of God, is that you assume it can only mean one thing. The reason “Word” is used to describe Jesus, is because Jesus is the message of God to his people. But God also spoke to people many times before Jesus was born as a man… that which He spoke is also his Word. In fact, everything that God said and did, is also his word, in the sense that it is how he revealed himself to us. Like the old saying, “Tell others about Christ, and if necessary, use words.” Actions speak louder than words. So we can deduce that actions are also message (word) to us.

It is illogical to say that because Jesus is perfect, the bible cannot be perfect. To contrast the two is wrong. Even if the bible has some grammatical or translation problems, it is wrong to assume it must be imperfect. You cannot have a committment to scripture while not having a committment to Christ. A committment to scripture implies a primary committment to God/Christ. So the two cannot be contrasted.

Of course it is good to ask questions.

We do not know whether Jobs friends had unquestioning faith. All we know is that they tried to comfort Job, and to help him find an explanation for his suffering.

The last sentence of your quote from Galatians puts it into perspective. “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.” Lack of circumcision, or even forbidding it, counts for nothing, just as circumcision (physical) also counts for nothing, but rather it is circumcision of the heart which God desires.

We can only truly live by the commandments of God, when we first exist in the New Covenant. It is Jesus who sets us free from sin, free from the power of sin, free from a lack of faith. If we are in Christ, then we will no longer keep on sinning. (“If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left” ,Heb 10:26) “No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God”. -I John 3:9.

I am really curious why you seem to be so much against the ten commandments? Or are you just against people who agree with the commandments? Do you think that everyone who wants to obey the commandments is not a Christian? or has denied Christ? or doesn’t trust Jesus? Do you think that Christians cannot love the commandments in service to Christ? In thankfulness to Jesus for his grace and mercy? You say that you follow Jesus, and we know that Jesus supported the commandments, and yet you seem to want to separate these commandments from the life of Christians? Why?

96

@johnZ

The situation is simple. The Bible says that Jesus is the WORD, Logos, the Way, the Truth, and the Light.

Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity. The Bible is a book, a most important book by which we can understand Who is God. There are other ways to understand God also, through Nature and the Holy Spirit. Still God as revealed through Jesus Christ is the object of our faith, not the Bible which is a conduit of knowledge about God.

A covenant is a commitment. The Mosaic Covenant is a commitment to love and obey YHWH through the following of the Mosaic Law. The Covenant of Jesus Christ is a commitment to love and obey Jesus Christ by picking up your cross and following Him.

97

You are right; Jesus is the Word. The Word made flesh. He was with God, and was God, from the beginning. “3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.” Yes, Jesus said he was the Way, the Truth, and the Light. No one comes to the Father, except thru Jesus.

Yes, in addition to scripture, we also can know God thru Nature. But we only truly know God if we are born again. Without being born again by the Spirit, we will reject the knowledge of God, as found in nature, in scripture, and in Christ.

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. I John

Yes, a covenant is a committment, an agreement. Yes, the old covenant includes a committment to love and obey God. But most of the old covenant was a promise by God to love his people. " 4 I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and will give them all these lands, and through your offspring[a] all nations on earth will be blessed,[b] 5 because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions."Gen 22.

Yes, through Jesus, the offspring of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, all nations are blessed. Yes, the new covenant of Jesus is a promise by God to make people righteous through Christ, so that they can love and obey God by following Christ, and seeking the desire of God.

98

@johnZ

Thank you for your response. Judging by it you are not really familiar with covenants and how they are used by God in the Bible. You quoted from the account of YHWH’s original covenant with Abram in Genesis, but the best known covenant is the Ten Commandments which was the covenant YHWH made with God’s People on Mt. Sinai. It has been renewed and extended down through time. Eddie says in his discussion with me that the New Covenant of Jesus Christ is just an extension of the Mosaic Covenant. I disagree.

God established the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, not only with the Chosen People Israel, but with all people, including Gentiles such as I. It is new because it is based on the uniqueness of the Incarnation, Life, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. I am not against the Ten Commandments, but I am against the idea that the New Covenant is based on the Old. If that were true, then the death of Jesus was unnecessary. If that were true, Salvation would be through the Old Covenant.

Our covenant with God is not both the New and the Old, but either the New or the Old.

99

Enough has been said on this, so I am deleting my previous comment here.

100

@johnZ

JohnZ,

I never said that I do not like the Old Covenant. Please do not judge me and put words in my mouth.

How am I quick to judge? I am trying to evaluate your position based on your words. If you disagree with what I say, then please say so, and not hide behind some mortal judgment.

The Old Covenant was between YHWH and Israel. The OC was supposed to solution to sin, but you are right, it is not.

Now to say that the New Covenant would not be necessary if Israel had obeyed the OC, 1) Puts an unfair onus on Israel, and 2) Indicates that YHWH did not foresee that Israel would not keep the OC. The Bible says that this was all a part of God’s Plan for Salvation.

The fact that people break the OC on a daily basis does not speak well of its being God’s solution for sin. The fact is that Jesus Christ is God’s solution for sin and not the Mosaic Covenant.

Jesus is the Alpha and Omega of our faith, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last. (Rev 21:6, 22:13) Jesus is the basis of the New Covenant with God the Father and the New Covenantal Law based on that New Covenant. While the Old Covenant helps us to understand the New, the are very different, so it is not true that we are bound by the Old Covenant which has been replaced by the New.

101

Enough has been said on this, so I am deleting my previous comment here.

102

Here is where I disagree with you. Sin is our broken relationship with God and others including nature. It developed because of the rebellion of humans against God, but the cause is not the result.

The Old Covenant was meant to bring the Hebrews back into proper relationship with God and it did so to some extent. But it did not solve the problem of sin, which is a problem of the “heart” and not the mind.

The Death and Resurrection of Jesus the Messiah fulfilled the Mosaic Law which enabled God to forgive humanity and thus restore the right love relationship between God and humanity. It also provided for the gift of the Holy Spirit to change the “hearts” of humans so we are no longer self centered.

There is no such thing as a one-sided covenant. Humans must accept God’s gift of salvation to receive it. If we insist on earning it, we will not received it.

Romans 4:3-6 (ESV)
3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due.
5 And to the one who does not work but believes in Him Who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,
6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:

Paul quotes Gen 15:6 to point out how Abraham was justified by God, made righteous through faith when he acted on faith to migrate to Canaan trusting in the Word of YHWH. Because Abraham believed that God would keep God’s promise to bless him, he acted in faith which was rewarded. It was the faith that was rewarded, not the deed.

Now Paul says that Abraham was counted as righteous, despite his sins, but it seems to me that God does not consider people righteous, that is in right relationship to God, unless they are righteous. This says that God wants us to be faithful and trusting, more than obedient , which can be mechanical. Of course obedience does come from faithfulness and trust, so they are not opposites, but Jesus made it clear that faith is first and foremost, Of course all the protestations of faith are useless if there are no fruit of the Spirit.

Certainly agree here, and if I may I would just like to point out that following Jesus does not mean obeying the 10 Commandments because He calls us to go way beyond the 10 Commandments to be like Jesus.

103

Enough has been said on this, so I am deleting my previous comment here.

104

Thank you, Jesus. You are Good.

105

@johnZ

Very true, but in all of my years in the church I have never heard a preacher preach on the Curse of Canaan. Have you? Clearly there are some parts of scripture that are more meaningful than others. The problem with what you are advocating is that it is not true that all parts of scripture have equal authority. Some are clearly more important, truer than others. The NT has more authority than the Old.

Forgive me for this oversight. It should be seek evident that if one’s first commitment is to the Bible, then one’s first commitment is not to Jesus Christ. As Jesus said, “You cannot serve two Masters.” He was not talking about the Bible and God, but the principle still holds.

I have noticed that Ken Ham calls the Bible the Word of God, thus giving it the title that the Bible gives to Jesus Christ, thus confusing the Bible and the Second Person of the Trinity. In my discussions with conservative Christians, including our friend Eddie, I find that this confusion is real.

The Bible is about Jesus, but the Bible is not Jesus. Jesus is God, the Bible is not. Jesus is Perfect without sin, while the Bible is not without fault. Only Jesus is worthy of our total commitment, the Bible is not.

John uses the Word Logos for Jesus, not Logos. Logos is God’s rational Word, not God’s unquestioned word. This not a question of doubt, but a question of understanding. If people do not ask questions they do not learn. Job learned about YHWH and faith by asking questions, and his faith was accepted by YHWH, while the unquestioning faith of his friends was not.

**> Galatians 5:1-6 (ESV)

1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.
3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.
4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.
5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness.
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.**

If you really believe in the Bible, then you should accept and understand what the Bible says, and that is Christians must live by faith in Jesus Christ and nothing else. This is what Paul is saying in Galatians. Circumcision represents the Law in any form. When you and Eddie say that Christians must live by the Ten Commandments, you are saying that we must live by the Mosaic Covenant, which means that we lose salvation through the New Covenant in Jesus Christ according to the Bible.

      ttp://discourse.biologos.org/t/is-jesus-the-god-of-the-old-testament/419/91