M-G: 4.2.15 // The God of the Two Testaments, Part 2

I love the Hebrew word hesed (phonetic, has-sed:b), particularly against the backdrop of the portrayal of God’s anger as a dominant theme in the OT, giving the impression that He is angry all the time. Well, that may be true if we are talking about the lost or sinful behavior (Psa 7:11; contrast Jn 3:16; Rom 5:8). It is, however, a word that conveys a different tone than wrath or anger by the various ways hesed is translated into the English language.

Whether God exercises mercy or wrath, all of His attributes are unified in one accord. God has no struggles within His nature; He is without vacillations, undulations, apprehensions, uncertainties, inconsistencies, limitations, or contradictions. This is difficult for us to understand because we can act out of character, contrary to our values, but it is not possible for God to act in any other way than who He is: the eternal, infinite, and immutable Almighty God, the great I AM (Ex 3:14; Jn 8:58). 

Hesed reveals words to the reader about God, like “kindness, lovingkindness, mercy, goodness, faithfulness, love, acts of kindness” (The Complete Word Study Dictionary, Zodhiates). It cuts against the grain of those only thinking of God as getting rough with man to get His way in OT times. People who insist on making a distinction about God in the two Testaments are quick to point out the wrath of God as if He is cold and cruel. These critics of God appear to have a personal vendetta to assassinate His character, but what they fail to mention in the same breath is that Yahweh is a God of hesed.  

If we make the assertion that the God of both Testaments is One and the same, then we must conclude that the God of wrath in the OT is also the God of love in the NT, and the God of love in the Old Testament is also the God of wrath in the NT. God saves all who come to Him by faith and sanctions eternal punishment in hell for those who reject His offer of salvation.

The major criticism stemming from this is that this idea of a loving God sending people to hell is such an unimaginable idea that attempts are made to reshape the image of God into something more palatable to the human mind. All that they choose to see is a God as a God of love by blocking out what they perceive as the “negative” aspect which is viewed as ominous and brutal.

This is essentially idolatry, retooling the image of God (Rom 1:25); this always leads to moral anarchy. God is not a monster because He allows the wicked to be punished in hell; sin turns people into monsters who value the moment over the forever by rejecting God's overtures of love to spare them from eternal separation and torment in the lake of fire. Sin is an egregious offense to the holiness of God; it demands divine retribution. It warps the heart, the seat of cognition, emotions, and volition, by turning people into beasts of the flesh. The truth is that the everlasting fire was originally prepared for the devil and his angels, not for man (cf. Mt 25:41); the fall of man radically changed his life, and his destination, and marred everything about him and the world around him.

So, in some sense, God is giving each person, who says, “God, stay out of my life,” their heart’s desire by granting them an eternity with no God, but in reality, they are there because they refused to allow Jesus to pay the penalty for their sin on the cross by refusing God’s love offer of salvation (Jn 3:16; Eph 2:8-9). The lake of fire is where people go to pay for the penalty of sin: eternal separation from God, eternal darkness, and suffering without mitigation or end (Dan 12:2; Mt 25:46a; 2 Thes 1:9; Rev 20:15; 21:8). 

There is no alternative of “No to God in the here and now and yes to God in the there and after.” The unfathomable depth of our depravity is seen in the depths God’s Son would go to redeem us (Mk 15:34; Rom 5:8). We are to be conformed to the image of His Son (according to the Scriptures), not in the image we choose to make of Him (Rom 8:29).

You and I are well acquainted with people that get all fired up over talking about incendiary and offensive ideas like the wrath of God, sin, hell, or the lake of fire! It just doesn’t fit the concept of a loving God to many, and the opponents of holiness or a God of wrath get all aflame over it and people like me! They don’t mind a God who is holy; they just don’t want that holiness to make demands in their lives, like personal holiness (Lev 19:2). The only people having a real serious issue with the holiness of God are those who do not know the LORD.

Let’s face it; people don’t want to be accountable to the concept of a “god” for sinful behavior. They don’t even like the word “sin,” and many will go through great strides to characterize some inexplicable human behavior with some kind of clinical terminology other than calling it plain old sin. Acknowledging a sinful nature by secularists, humanists, or atheists is untenable because it gives credence and validation to the teachings and claims of the Bible.

Avoiding or dismissing intellectually the concept of sin does not negate the reality of it or the wrath of God directed toward human sin and disobedience to His will (e.g., Num 32:10-11, 12-13). Wrath is associated with His anger and indignation. God is not reactive or impulsive in this regard (Psa 7:11; 103:8). During OT times the biggest culprit was idolatry (Psa 78:58-59). The anger of the LORD is always incurred by those who reject His authority as outlined in Scripture (Psa 2:1-6; Nah 1:3; Jn 3:36; Rom 1:18; 2:5-6).

God’s wrath is just, righteous, perfect, and holy. We are warned about human wrath (Rom 12:19; Eph 4:26; Col 3:8); because, unlike God, we are sinners and can be unjust, unrighteous, imperfect, and unholy in our anger more times than not. This does not mean there is a moratorium on expressing righteous indignation over sinful behavior. There is coming in the future a day of wrath (Zeph 1:14, 15; Zech 7:12). Thankfully, as believers we escape the wrath of God (Rom 5:9; 1 Thess 1:10; 5:9)!

Though the wrath or anger of God strikes fear in the heart, and rightly so, words like hesed (mercy, kindness, lovingkindness, goodness) in the OT and agape (love) in the NT brings a grateful relief like the summer rains ending a severe drought. We must make no mistake in underestimating the ramifications of sin; God hates it and is deadly serious in dealing with it (Ezek 18:20; Rom 5:12; Jn 3:16). This masculine noun, hesed, occurs 248 times (KJV, H2617, Strong’s coding) in the OT. It has been translated as mercy (x139), kindness (x40), lovingkindness (x26), goodness (x12), kindly (x5), lovingkindness (x4), merciful (x4), favour (x3), good (x1), goodliness (x1), pity (x1), reproach (x1), wicked thing (x1). That last usage is kind of bizarre.

The classic passage of hesed is found in Psalm 136 where it is used twenty-six times to proclaim, “For His mercy [hesed] endures forever.” Of its total occurrences in the OT, hesed is associated with God x187 (75.4%), and it is used in reference to man x61 (24.6%). Conversely, if you recall from the chart that the word “wrath” appears 109 times in reference to God in the OT. 

After reading through all of these verses on hesed, it put me in a hallelujah state of mind for it reminded me of God’s enduring mercy and lovingkindness (e.g., Psa 25:10; 32:10; 33:5; 36:7; 63:3; 103:11, 17)! The greatest display of that hesed of God was found on the cross and when I asked for forgiveness for my sins. How about you?  

  

Now, both the OT (Zeph 1:14, 15) and the NT (Jn 3:36) support the concept of God judging sin. Could it be because the God of the OT and the God of the NT are One and the same God?! We can focus on the love of God all day long, but sin is not going away; it must be dealt with because sin is synonymous with disobedience; both words miss the mark of God’s standard of righteousness or holiness (Rom 3:10, 23).  

With all the love dominating the news in the NT according to an unfair and unbalanced report of God, this wrath thing is not limited to only an OT idea, Jesus Himself, John the Baptist, Paul, and John were preaching a Gospel that included the wrath of God. Does the good news of the Gospel contain any bad news? Yep, unless you are one of those who believe in universal salvation or see the glass half full – “It’s all good.”

The Gospel of death, burial, and resurrection has to include a reason for all of that! What was the point of Christ’s suffering and death on the cross if it wasn’t to redeem us from something? Why are we called lost? Why get saved if there is nothing to be saved from? Jesus was enduring humiliation and suffering at the hands of men and worst of all being separated from God in order to satisfy the penalty for man’s sin as his Substitute for sin! Jesus didn’t have to do it! It was grace, unmerited favor in the face of deserved wrath; it was pure mercy, undeserved grace.

Jesus endured that punishment on the cross so we wouldn’t have to, Selah! The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ together is God’s way out for us from experiencing the looming wrath of God for sin. Hell must be a component of the Gospel message. The question, “Do you want to go to heaven when you die,” isn’t going to cut it. Who is not for utopia if you believe in something greater than man, like the concept of a Creator God?

There are at least three great reasons for going to heaven: (1) Jesus is there, (2) saved loved ones are there, and (3) hell is the alternative! It’s a no-brainer. The primary reason I accepted Christ in my life was that I didn’t want to go to hell. When my eyes were opened to the reality that by receiving God’s offer of salvation I could avoid hell, Jesus had my vote, and I took Him up on His offer! My love for God developed from there going forward. The Gospel has to include the wrath of God for sin; otherwise, there is no need for man to repent and follow Christ.

Paul’s suffering (Acts 9:16) for the Gospel is a compelling argument for the reality of the Good News. Why would Paul put his life on the line daily or even hourly if there was no life after death, no rewards, or no eternal joy after all of the suffering and pain he experienced proclaiming the Gospel on this side of eternity (1 Cor 15:30-31; compare some of his ordeals: Rom 8:36-39; 2 Cor 4:8-12; 6:9; 11:23-27; Gal 5:11; 2 Tim 1:12; 2:9-10; 3:11)!?

Even though the Gospel has an element of bad news in it, the good news is that we can escape God’s wrath for sin because Jesus propitiated the just demands of the Father for sin. I read somewhere where a person was saying something to the effect that the good news was not that there was no wrath of God, but that mankind could be saved from the wrath of God through the new birth in Jesus Christ (Rom 5:8-9; 1 Thess 1:10). Now, that’s very good news!

In Part 3, I will offer some reasons as to why this notion of a difference in the God of the two Testaments is not going to fly. The fifth one will be the coup de grâce to such an opinion that God is capricious. <><

To Part 3