BxB

Major Questions from the Gospel of John - #1 and #2
Added 6/21/99
By: Dr. Kenneth Hart - 1999
Formatted By: Haydn k. Piper - 1999

- STUDY GUIDE - ADDITINAL QUESTIONS IN THE STUDY ON JOHN

Is it possible that there is a different "God" in the Old Testament than in the New Testament? Can we be certain that God is the same throughout the Bible? Could the gentle Jesus who said "neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more" (John 8:11) be the same God that thundered on Sinai (Exodus 19,20), sent the flood (Genesis 6-8), and slew one hundred and eighty-five thousand Assyrians (2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 37:36), etc.?

By contrast, the New Testament says that Christ Himself was the One who led Israel through the wilderness. See 1 Corinthians 10:1-4:

I want you to remember, my brothers and sisters, what happened to our ancestors who followed Moses. They were all under the protection of the cloud, and all passed safely through the Red Sea.
In the cloud and in the sea they were all baptized as followers of Moses.
All ate the same spiritual bread, and
drank the same spiritual drink. They drank from the spiritual rock that went with them; and that rock was Christ himself." (GNB)

But more important than that are the statements made by Christ Himself:

Luke 24:44: "Then he said to them, 'These are the very things I told you about while I was still with you: everything written about me in the Law of Moses, the writings of the prophets, and the Psalms had to come true.'" (GNB)
John 5:39,40:39 "You study the Scriptures, because you think that in them you will find eternal life. And these very Scriptures speak about me! 40 Yet you are not willing to come to me in order to have life." (GNB)

John 10:30 "The Father and I are one." (GNB)
John 17:11, 21 "And now I am coming to you; I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world. Holy Father! Keep them safe by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one just as you and I are one." (GNB)

Ellen White says:

"The message was now given them from Jehovah: "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of Him, and obey His voice, provoke Him not; for He will not pardon your transgressions: for My name is in Him. But if thou shalt indeed obey His voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries." (Exodus 23:20-22).

During all the wanderings of Israel, Christ, in the pillar of cloud and of fire, was their Leader. While there were types pointing to a Saviour to come, there was also a present Saviour, who gave commands to Moses for the people, and who was set forth before them as the only channel of blessing." Patriarchs and Prophets 311.

"In all these revelations of the divine presence the glory of God was manifested through Christ. Not alone at the Saviour's advent, but through all the ages after the Fall and the promise of redemption, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself." 2 Corinthians 5:19. Christ was the foundation and center of the sacrificial system in both the patriarchal and the Jewish age. Since the sin of our first parents there has been no direct communication between God and man. The Father has given the world into the hands of Christ, that through His mediatorial work He may redeem man and vindicate the authority and holiness of the law of God. All the communion between heaven and the fallen race has been through Christ. It was the Son of God that gave to our first parents the promise of redemption. It was He who revealed Himself to the patriarchs. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses understood the gospel. They looked for salvation through man's Substitute and Surety. These holy men of old held communion with the Saviour who was to come to our world in human flesh; and some of them talked with Christ and heavenly angels face to face." Patriarchs and Prophets 366

"God's work is the same in all time, although there are different degrees of development and different manifestations of His power, to meet the wants of men in the different ages. Beginning with the first gospel promise, and coming down through the patriarchal and Jewish ages, and even to the present time, there has been a gradual unfolding of the purposes of God in the plan of redemption. The Saviour typified in the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish law is the very same that is revealed in the gospel. The clouds that enveloped His divine form have rolled back; the mists and shades have disappeared; and Jesus, the world's Redeemer, stands revealed. He who proclaimed the law from Sinai, and delivered to Moses the precepts of the ritual law, is the same that spoke the Sermon on the Mount. The great principles of love to God, which He set forth as the foundation of the law and the prophets, are only a reiteration of what He had spoken through Moses to the Hebrew people: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." Deuteronomy 6:4, 5. "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Leviticus 19:18. The teacher is the same in both dispensations. God's claims are the same. The principles of His government are the same. For all proceed from Him "with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." James 1:17." (Patriarchs and Prophets 373)

"The Israelites were continually losing sight of the fact that they were under divine guidance. They forgot that the Angel of the covenant was their invisible leader, that, veiled by the cloudy pillar, the presence of Christ went before them, and that from Him Moses received all his directions." (Patriarchs and Prophets 395,396

If this is the true explanation, how do we know when to attribute what we are reading in the Old Testament to God, and when to suggest that it is merely the ideas of the Jewish writers? (What parts are inspired?)
Are we really going to believe that the Jewish army was so much superior to their enemies that they could wipe out whole armies without even losing a single soldier? (Deuteronomy 4:38; 7:1; 9:1; 11:23) How are we going to explain occasions when "God" apparently did almost all of the "fighting"? (See story of Jericho [Joshua 6]; the Assyrian army [2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 37:36]; David and the Philistines [2 Samuel 5:23-25]; Gideon [Judges 7]; etc.) And what about Elijah and the priests of Baal? (1 Kings 18 esp. 40; 1 Kings Teacher's Guide #22) And what about events such as the flood (Genesis 6-8) and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18,19) which are essentially impossible to explain without God's direct intervention?
In the past, people who have taken this view and started down this road have often ended up rejecting virtually all that is of a "miraculous" nature in Scripture.

Another possible explanation is that God chooses to stoop down and meet people where they are in their experience. This leads to the conclusion that God even uses "emergency measures" at times to remind us that He is present and should be respected. Using this explanation, God actually did say all those things that may seem harsh in the Old Testament but it was necessary for God to do what He did under the circumstances to reach the people where they were at the time.
God did not choose the Jewish nation because they were all "saints". That should be obvious. But He may have chosen them because they would end up demonstrating best of all both the good and bad things that God needed to demonstrate before the entire universe. We must not conclude therefore that the Israelites were somehow treated preferentially. (See page on Was God Fair to the Egyptians and Canaanites? ).

On the other hand, it is clear that God worked very closely with a number of people from among them, and they were guided to write down and preserve a record of God's dealing with them. No other nation that we know of has done this.
Even in the New Testament God acts in ways that sometimes sound very much like the Old Testament. Ananias and Sapphira were struck down on the church floor. (See Acts 5:1-11) There is no reasonable explanation for their deaths except that God did it.
God also speaks in almost frightening language in the New Testament. The strongest language in the entire Bible is in the third angel's message. (See Revelation 14:9-12) Certainly we would not want to suggest that this is not God's message to us at the end of time!

Conclusion: If we are going to take seriously the words of Scripture, we must believe that both the Old Testament and the New Testament are fully inspired and represent what God wants us to know about Him when adequately understood. This means that every story, every verse, no matter how it came to us, represents in human language something that God wants to say. God knew how it would come out. No Bible writer produced anything that God didn't know about in advance. If God had felt that what any writer was going to write would misrepresent the truth or His character and government in the great controversy He certainly could have and should have prevented it from being written. I believe that God has taken the responsibility of representing Himself adequately to me in my day, and I don't believe that He has failed in this responsibility.
Therefore I do not believe that, despite the devil's best efforts, God is significantly misrepresented in Scripture. See also: Who's Afraid of the Old Testament God? by Alden Thompson and Nahum TG #6; Intertestamental Period TG #10

Why would God give the whole sacrificial system in the Old Testament and then suggest in John 16:25-27 that there is no need for Him or anyone else to plead with the Father for us?
25 "I have used figures of speech to tell you these things. But the time will come when I will not use figures of speech, but will speak to you plainly about the Father. 26 When that day comes, you will ask him in my name; and I do not say that I will ask him on your behalf, 27 for the Father himself loves you. He loves you because you love me and have believed that I came from God." (GNB)
The sacrificial system was apparently given in its most basic form at the gate of the garden of Eden. The first time we read about it is when Cain and Abel offered different sacrifices and Abel please God, while Cain didn't. (See Genesis 4:1-16) Adam, no doubt, offered the very first sacrifice at the gate of the garden of Eden. Imagine Adam and Eve there with God directing them, offering that first lamb. What did they "kill" it with? A stone? What did they think when they saw the blood come out?
Did they have to hit it multiple times? It must have been a very sad occasion for Adam and Eve. Because of this terrible ritual they would never forget that their own sin was responsible for the death of these innocent victims:

"The sacrificial offerings were ordained by God to be to man a perpetual reminder and a penitential acknowledgment of his sin and a confession of his faith in the promised Redeemer. They were intended to impress upon the fallen race the solemn truth that it was sin that caused death. To Adam, the offering of the first sacrifice was a most painful ceremony. His hand must be raised to take life, which only God could give. It was the first time he had ever witnessed death, and he knew that had he been obedient to God, there would have been no death of man or beast. As he slew the innocent victim, he trembled at the thought that his sin must shed the blood of the spotless Lamb of God. This scene gave him a deeper and more vivid sense of the greatness of his transgression, which nothing but the death of God's dear Son could expiate. And he marveled at the infinite goodness that would give such a ransom to save the guilty. A star of hope illumined the dark and terrible future and relieved it of its utter desolation." Patriarchs and Prophets 68; LHU 324; compare 1SP 53 and ST January 30, 1879. See also Leviticus TG #'s 1-6, 15; Hebrews 9:16-10:4
Unfortunately, it wasn't long before humans came to regard the sacrifice of animals as routine. Many even came to believe that it was a payment for their sin and thus if they had enough lambs available to be "payments", they could almost sin with impunity. Instead of serving as a reminder of the awfulness of sin, (Hebrews 10:3,4) it became a way to "pay" for one's sins.
The idea of offering a sacrifice soon spread to virtually all the cultures and religious systems of the ancient world. Some even went so far as to offer their children to appease what they believed was the wrath of an angry "god". The descendants of Abraham, while learning from him of the importance of offering sacrifices, no doubt incorporated many ideas from pagan religions to explain the practice.
As Paul says in Romans 8:3 "What the Law could not do, because human nature was weak, God did. He condemned sin in human nature by sending his own Son, who came with a nature like our sinful nature, to do away with sin." (GNB) In other words, the ceremonial system did not actually remove sins or it would not have been necessary for Jesus to come and die. Furthermore, when comparing Jesus, the true Sacrifice, with the old Jewish system, Paul says this in Hebrews 10:1-4,11,17,18.
The Jewish Law is not a full and faithful model of the real things; it is only a faint outline of the good things to come. The same sacrifices are offered forever, year after year. How can the Law, then by means of these sacrifices make perfect the people who come to God? If the people worshiping God had really been purified from their sins, they would not feel guilty of sin any more, and all sacrifices would stop. As it is, however, the sacrifices serve year after year to remind people of their sins. For the blood of bulls and goats can never take away sins...Every Jewish priest performs his services every day and offers the same sacrifices many times; [Exodus 29:38] but these sacrifices can never take away sins...And then he says, 'I will not remember their sins and evil deeds any longer.' [Jeremiah 31:34] So when these have been forgiven, an offering to take away sins is no longer needed." (GNB)
It was very clear in Paul's mind that sins were not removed by all these sacrifices. The sacrificial system was only a "faint outline" of the truth as it was demonstrated in the life and death of Jesus Christ.

Please read the full story of Paul's comparison of the two systems as described in Hebrews 9 and 10.
In light of this hindsight you might ask, Why would God bother to set up this whole system in the first place? There are several possible explanations:

The children of Israel were looking for a system of sacrifice and worship that was at least somewhat familiar to them. Just as they had trouble with the "invisible God" on the top of Mt. Sinai and wanted the golden calf instead, they were looking for a system that they could understand somewhat in the terms of what they had grown accustomed to from their pagan environment. God did not ask them to totally change their pattern of worship lest they reject His suggestions without even much consideration. People may not like the form of worship that they are currently familiar with, but they will tend to be very resistant to any radical change in it which comes too quickly.

As we note when comparing the Code of Hammurabi and the Laws of God (See Exodus TG #21; Pagan Gods handout) given through Moses, even these pagan systems of worship can be traced ultimately back to the true worship of God as established outside the garden of Eden. When an Israelite came to the sanctuary and confessed his sins onto the head of a lamb, he was saying that the lamb or goat or bull was now to take his place. (Leviticus 4) Then the sinner himself was to take the life of the victim representing himself. This was supposed to teach that sin reacts upon us and destroys us. Then after the appropriate preparations were made, portions of the offering were to be placed on the altar of burnt offering. There it was consumed by the fire representing God's presence.
This was supposed to teach them that sin cannot survive in God's presence. Unfortunately they tended to get the message that if you were willing to pay for your sins by offering a lamb then you could go ahead and live your life as you wanted.

God wanted them to get the very serious message that sin leads to death.

Later writers even in the Old Testament made it quite clear that God keeps a permanent record of sins. (Ecclesiastes 12:13,14, 18; Ezekiel 33:10-20) It should be obvious to us that if we can remember our past sins then our guardian angel can remember them, and God can remember them as well. God does not treat us well because He has forgotten that we ever were sinners, but because He chooses to ignore our past records in light of the changes that have taken place in our lives. (Jeremiah 31:34; Ezekiel 36:26-28; Hebrews 10:17)

Sin is something that happens in people. There is no such thing as a commodity called "sin" that can be separated from a person and carried around or placed on the head of an animal. It follows then that the only way to "deal with sin" is to make a change in people and in their relation to their God. This change is so remarkable that God calls it a new birth. (John 3:3-8)
Finally, Jesus came and died to show us the real nature of the death that results from sin and no human being observed the whole process either at Gethsemane or Calvary. It wasn't until many years later that Paul began to discuss the many issues involved. (Romans 3 and Hebrews 9 &10)
Despite having given this system in the beginning, God clearly recognized that it would not accomplish what He would have liked. It did not convince many people of the seriousness of sin. As a result God had to add many more "ceremonies" and "laws" to try to get people to take Him seriously as well as to preserve their "relationship" until they came to understand a little better what God was really trying to accomplish.

"If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved in the ark by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity of the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, which circumcision was a token or pledge of, they would never have gone into idolatry, and been suffered to go down into Egypt, and there would have been no necessity of God's proclaiming his law from Sinai, and engraving it upon tables of stone, and guarding it by definite directions in the judgments and statutes given to Moses.
"Moses wrote these judgments and statutes from the mouth of God while he was with him in the mount. If the people of God had obeyed the principles of the ten commandments, there would have been no need of the specific directions given to Moses, which he wrote in a book, relative to their duty to God and to one another. The definite directions which the Lord gave to Moses in regard to the duty of his people to one another, and to the stranger, are the principles of the ten commandments simplified, and given in a definite manner that they need not err." Spiritual Gifts , vol. 3, p. 299,300 (1864); 1SP 264; The Signs of the Times June, 17, 1880; compare PH 064 p. 19 (1875)
"If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign, they would never have been seduced into idolatry, nor would it have been necessary for them to suffer a life of bondage in Egypt; they would have kept God's law in mind, and there would have been no necessity for it to be proclaimed from Sinai or engraved upon the tables of stone. And had the people practiced the principles of the Ten Commandments, there would have been no need of the additional directions given to Moses." Patriarchs and Prophets 364 (1890)
Conclusion: In summary then, it would appear that God gave the sacrificial system as a faint "shadow" (Hebrews 10:1-4) of the plan of salvation. It apparently was some sort of compromise between what God's ideal was and what the people's understanding was. No doubt it was God's plan to gradually wean them away from a simple understanding based on the "sandbox" model that He gave them, to a clearer illustration which would be closer to the truth as He planned to give it in the future through the life and death of Jesus. But once again, the people's tendency to be attracted to pagan services and rites resulted in their moving farther from the truth as God wanted to present it rather than closer.
In addition to the meaning of the whole sacrificial system we need to consider the role of mediator or priest that became such an important part of Jewish and later Christian religious services. Did God give us the "priestly role" in order to teach something important about Himself or was there some other reason? The first mention of a "mediator" in Scripture is a very interesting one. The children of Israel were at the foot of Mt. Sinai and God had just given them the commandments and many other instructions from the top of the mountain. The people were scared to death of God and in, (Exodus 20:19) "They said to Moses, "If you speak to us, we will listen; but we are afraid that if God speaks to us, we will die." (GNB)
Who was asking for the Intercessor/Mediator? Not God, but the people. They felt that they needed someone in between themselves and this powerful God that they were just getting to know. They wanted Him to be powerful enough to beat the Egyptians and the Canaanites, but they were afraid that if His power was turned on them, they would be destroyed on the spot!
(See Exodus TG #15; John TG #17; Servants or Friends, chap. 6)
God has always wanted us to be His friends, but when we are so afraid that we cannot even consider relating to Him in a friendly way, He offers an "Intercessor" or "Mediator" who turns out to be God Himself! But we have had such a hard time recognizing Him for who He is.

THIS PAGE HOSTED BY

GET YOUR OWN