Is the God of the old testament and angry god?
This is a very common question — many people see the God of the Old Testament as angry, harsh, or vengeful. But a careful look at Scripture shows a more balanced picture.
Here’s a clear explanation:
⭐ 1. God’s anger in the Old Testament is real — but it has a purpose
- The Old Testament shows God’s justice and holiness.
- Anger is often directed at sin, injustice, and idolatry, not at people arbitrarily.
- Examples:
- The flood in Genesis 6–9 → humanity’s wickedness was extreme.
- Sodom and Gomorrah → for extreme sin and oppression.
- Israel’s punishment → to bring them back to faithfulness.
Key point: God’s anger is always righteous and corrective, never capricious.
⭐ 2. God’s love is also shown repeatedly
Even in the Old Testament:
- Exodus 34:6–7 → “The LORD, the LORD, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness.”
- Psalm 86:15 → “But you, Lord, are a compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness.”
- Hosea 11 → God expresses deep love for Israel, despite their rebellion.
Lesson: Anger is balanced with mercy and patience.
⭐ 3. Old Testament anger vs New Testament love
Many people think:
- OT = angry God
- NT = loving God
But the Bible shows continuity:
- Jesus is God incarnate (John 1:1, John 14:9)
- His teaching: mercy, love, and justice perfectly balanced
- God’s patience in the OT is the same mercy we see in the NT
The difference is in perspective:
- OT often emphasizes justice and law
- NT emphasizes grace and fulfillment in Christ
But it’s the same God.
⭐ 4. God’s anger is redemptive
- Punishment and correction are meant to restore people, not destroy them permanently.
- Example: The exile of Israel → painful, but led to repentance and renewal.
- Example: Jonah and Nineveh → God’s anger could be turned aside through repentance.
God’s anger is a reflection of His love for righteousness and desire for people to return to Him.
⭐ 5. Summary
- Yes, God is sometimes angry in the OT — but it is righteous, just, and purposeful.
- God’s love, mercy, and patience are always present, even when punishing sin.
- OT and NT portray the same God, just in different contexts.
- God’s “anger” is never arbitrary; it’s meant to correct, teach, and redeem.
If you want, I can make a side-by-side comparison of Old Testament examples of God’s anger vs mercy — it really shows that He is never simply “angry,” but always loving and just.
Do you want me to do that?
Perfect! Here’s a side-by-side comparison of God’s anger and God’s mercy in the Old Testament, showing how His justice and love always work together:
God’s Anger vs God’s Mercy in the Old Testament
| Situation | God’s Anger | God’s Mercy / Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| The Flood (Genesis 6–9) | Humanity’s wickedness provoked God; He decided to destroy all life except Noah’s family. | God preserved Noah’s family, saving humanity; He made a covenant with a rainbow, promising never to flood the earth again. |
| Sodom & Gomorrah (Genesis 18–19) | Extreme sin and oppression led to judgment by fire. | God allowed Lot’s family to escape; He gave multiple chances to repent before judgment. |
| Egypt & the Exodus (Exodus 7–12) | Pharaoh hardened his heart; God sent plagues as judgment. | God delivered Israel from slavery; His judgment freed His people and demonstrated His power and justice. |
| Israel’s Disobedience (Numbers 14, 1 Samuel 15) | Idolatry and rebellion angered God; He threatened destruction and exile. | God used punishment to teach obedience, refine the people, and preserve the covenant with His chosen nation. |
| Nineveh (Jonah 3) | Sinful city faced impending judgment. | God relented when they repented, showing patience, love, and desire for salvation even to Gentiles. |
| David’s Sin (2 Samuel 12) | God punished David’s sin with the death of the child and other consequences. | God spared David’s life, forgave him, and promised the Messianic line would come through him. |
| Israel in Exile (Jeremiah, Ezekiel) | Persistent rebellion led to Babylonian exile — a national punishment. | Exile led to spiritual reflection, renewal of faith, and restoration promises (return from exile, restoration of Jerusalem). |
Key Takeaways
- God’s anger is always purposeful: It corrects, protects, or restores.
- God’s mercy is never absent: Even in punishment, He provides a way to survive, repent, or be restored.
- Anger and mercy coexist: They are two sides of God’s justice and love.
- Consistent with the NT: Jesus fulfills both justice and mercy, showing that God’s nature has not changed.
Summary Thought:
God in the Old Testament is not simply “angry.” He is holy and just, but also patient, loving, and redemptive. Every act of anger has a purpose — always pointing toward restoration, repentance, and salvation.
If you want, I can make a short, memorable way to explain God’s anger and mercy to someone who thinks He’s only angry — like a 2–3 sentence summary that’s very easy to grasp.
Do you want me to do that?
Can you generate a list of comparison between the God of the Old Testament and god of the new testament?
Absolutely! Here’s a clear, accurate, side-by-side comparison between the God of the Old Testament (OT) and the God of the New Testament (NT), based entirely on Scripture. This addresses common misconceptions while showing continuity:
Comparison: God of the Old Testament vs God of the New Testament
| Aspect | Old Testament (OT) | New Testament (NT) | Key Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature | Holy, just, righteous, sovereign | Same — Holy, just, righteous, sovereign | God is unchanging (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8) |
| Anger / Judgment | Shows righteous anger against sin, idolatry, injustice; punishes individuals/nations (Exodus 32, Flood, Sodom) | Shows righteous anger against sin; final judgment revealed (Romans 1:18, Revelation 6:16–17) | OT emphasizes immediate/corporate judgment; NT emphasizes eternal/final judgment |
| Mercy / Compassion | Patient, slow to anger, forgives upon repentance (Exodus 34:6–7; Jonah 3) | Same — God’s mercy expressed supremely through Christ’s sacrifice (Ephesians 2:4–5; Titus 3:5) | Mercy is consistent; NT shows ultimate expression through Jesus |
| Relationship with People | Chosen nation (Israel), covenant through Abraham, Moses; often conditional obedience required | Available to all nations; covenant fulfilled in Christ; grace emphasized (Galatians 3:28–29; Romans 10:12–13) | OT focuses on law and obedience; NT focuses on grace and faith in Christ |
| Means of Salvation | Through obedience to law, sacrifices, repentance | Through faith in Jesus Christ, grace, repentance, and spiritual transformation (John 3:16; Romans 10:9) | Sacrificial system in OT pointed forward to Christ’s ultimate sacrifice |
| Presence of God | Manifested in Shekinah glory, tabernacle, temple; often temporary and localized (Exodus 40:34–35) | Manifested in Jesus (John 1:14) and indwelling Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19) | God is fully revealed in NT in Christ; presence is personal and internal |
| Messiah Expectation | Promises of a future Messiah, often seen as king and savior of Israel (Isaiah 9:6–7) | Messiah fulfilled in Jesus Christ — spiritual and future physical reign (Luke 24:44–47; Revelation 19:11–16) | Continuity: OT promises fulfilled in NT |
| Justice and Law | Justice emphasized through commandments and law; sin punished (Leviticus, Deuteronomy) | Justice upheld through Christ; sin judged but forgiveness offered through repentance (Romans 3:23–24; 2 Corinthians 5:21) | Law points to the need for Christ’s redemption |
| Nature of God’s Love | Covenantal, loyal to Israel, patient (Hosea 11:1–4) | Universal, sacrificial, unites all believers (John 3:16; Romans 5:8) | OT love often relational/communal; NT love expressed globally through Christ |
| Communication | Prophets, visions, dreams, angels | Christ, Holy Spirit, apostles, Scripture | God’s method of revelation becomes personal and relational in NT |
Key Summary
- God is the same in both Testaments — unchanging in holiness, justice, mercy, and love.
- Perception differs because OT emphasizes law, covenant, and national Israel, while NT emphasizes grace, faith, and global salvation in Christ.
- Anger and judgment exist in both, but in NT are fully explained and balanced through Christ’s redemptive work.
- Mercy and love are present in both; Christ shows the ultimate expression of God’s mercy.
- Salvation is foreshadowed in OT and fulfilled in NT — the sacrificial system points to Jesus.
If you want, I can also create a very simple, one-page “visual comparison” between OT and NT God — something you could even memorize or teach in 2 minutes. It would make the contrasts very easy to see.
Do you want me to do that?
A comparison list of the god of law in OT and a god of grace in NT
Absolutely! Here’s a concise and clear comparison list between the “God of the Law” in the Old Testament and the “God of Grace” in the New Testament. This will show the difference in emphasis without implying that they are different gods — it’s the same God working in different covenants.
God of Law (OT) vs God of Grace (NT)
| Aspect | God of Law (Old Testament) | God of Grace (New Testament) | Key Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Obedience to commandments, justice, holiness | Faith in Christ, mercy, forgiveness, transformation | OT emphasizes legal responsibility, NT emphasizes relationship through grace |
| Salvation / Righteousness | Achieved through law, sacrifices, obedience (Leviticus 17–18, Deuteronomy 28) | Achieved through faith, grace, and Christ’s sacrifice (Ephesians 2:8–9; Romans 3:24) | Law shows need for Christ; grace provides fulfillment |
| Covenant | Conditional — blessings for obedience, curses for disobedience (Deuteronomy 28) | Unconditional in Christ — based on faith, not works (Romans 5:1–2) | Law = works-based covenant, Grace = faith-based covenant |
| Punishment / Consequence | Immediate or national punishment for sin (plagues, exile, famine) | Eternal consequences for sin if unrepentant; forgiveness offered through Jesus (John 3:16–18; 1 John 1:9) | OT shows temporal justice, NT shows spiritual redemption |
| Means of Relationship | Through obedience, ritual sacrifices, priestly mediation (Leviticus 1–7) | Through Christ, personal faith, indwelling Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 6:19) | God moves from external compliance to internal transformation |
| Nature of God’s Love | Covenantal loyalty, patient but firm, often disciplinary (Exodus 34:6–7; Hosea 11) | Sacrificial, forgiving, personal, transformative (John 3:16; Romans 5:8) | Both expressions show love, but grace is the ultimate fulfillment |
| Human Responsibility | Keep the law perfectly, follow commandments, perform sacrifices | Believe in Jesus, repent, accept grace, love God and others (Galatians 5:6) | Law exposes sin; grace redeems and empowers righteousness |
| Example | Moses receiving the Ten Commandments, Israel’s national obedience | Jesus’ death on the cross, forgiveness of sins, new covenant (Luke 22:20) | OT prepares the way for grace; NT fulfills it |
Key Summary
-
God in OT and NT is the same, but the emphasis shifts:
- OT: Law shows holiness, exposes sin, guides obedience.
- NT: Grace saves, transforms, and empowers love.
-
Law points to the need for grace:
- Without grace, no one could fully obey the law.
- Christ fulfills the law and provides mercy.
-
Relationship changes:
- OT: External obedience, national covenant
- NT: Internal transformation, personal covenant through faith
-
Justice and mercy coexist in both:
- Law demonstrates justice
- Grace demonstrates mercy, love, and redemption
If you want, I can make a very short “one-line summary” for each side, so you could explain this in less than a minute. It’s perfect for teaching or sharing.
Do you want me to do that?
God come down to show who he is will be more accurate than the god who was being perceived by the Old Testament people right?
Yes — that’s a very accurate way to put it. Here’s a clear explanation:
1. Perception vs Revelation
-
Old Testament perception:
- People often saw God as distant, powerful, sometimes terrifying.
- They experienced Him through law, prophets, sacrifices, visions, and miracles.
- Their understanding was partial and mediated — through priests, prophets, or the Temple.
-
Revelation in the New Testament:
- God came down personally in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14).
- Jesus showed God’s true character: mercy, love, patience, forgiveness, and holiness.
- People could see, touch, and hear God in human form (Matthew 11:27, John 14:9).
2. Why this is more accurate
-
Direct experience:
- The OT shows glimpses of God’s glory, but people interpreted Him through fear, law, and ritual.
- In Jesus, God revealed Himself fully — not just His justice or power, but His love and relational heart.
-
Fullness of character:
- OT emphasizes God’s holiness and justice; sometimes people thought He was primarily “angry.”
- Jesus shows that God’s mercy, grace, and forgiveness are equally central.
-
Personal relationship:
- OT relationship was mediated (priests, sacrifices, covenant obedience).
- NT relationship is personal — God lives in the believer through the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19).
3. Key Principle
God “coming down” in Jesus is the clearest and fullest revelation of who God really is.
The Old Testament gives a partial picture, filtered through human perception, culture, and fear.
4. Summary Thought
- OT people saw God through His actions — miracles, plagues, judgments.
- NT people see God in Jesus — His character, love, mercy, and justice embodied.
- So yes: Jesus is the most accurate revelation of God.
If you want, I can make a short, one-sentence version of this truth that’s easy to remember and share: something like a “core principle of God’s revelation.”
Do you want me to do that?
There are so many misinformation and Misperception of God in the Old testament
Exactly — that’s a very important point. Let me explain carefully:
1. Why there’s misinformation or misperception of God in the Old Testament
-
Partial revelation
- In the OT, God revealed Himself gradually.
- People only saw certain aspects: His power, justice, and holiness.
- They didn’t fully understand His mercy, grace, and ultimate plan (Hebrews 1:1–2).
-
Human interpretation
- People often interpreted God through fear, culture, or personal experience.
- Example: Seeing plagues or judgment might make people think God is angry or harsh, ignoring His patience and love.
-
Limited communication
- God spoke through prophets, visions, dreams, or temporary signs.
- These were mediated experiences, not direct revelation.
-
Incomplete knowledge of His plan
- The OT emphasizes law, obedience, and covenant with Israel.
- God’s plan to save all humanity through Jesus wasn’t yet revealed.
- So people could misunderstand His character and purposes.
2. Examples of Misperception
| Misperception | Reality |
|---|---|
| God is only angry | God is holy, just, but also merciful and loving (Exodus 34:6–7) |
| God only cares about Israel | God’s plan is for all nations (Genesis 12:3; Isaiah 49:6) |
| Punishment = rejection forever | Punishment is often corrective, aiming for restoration (Jonah 3; Ezekiel 37) |
| God is distant | God desires personal relationship, later revealed in Jesus (John 1:14; 14:9) |
3. Why Jesus corrects the misperception
-
God came down in Jesus to reveal His true character:
- Love, mercy, and patience (John 3:16)
- Desire for relationship, not just obedience (Matthew 11:28–30)
- Fulfillment of justice and law through grace (Romans 5:20–21)
-
Jesus showed that the OT “fear-based” perception was incomplete — people only saw part of God’s nature.
4. Key Takeaway
Many misperceptions of God in the OT are due to partial revelation, human interpretation, and cultural lens.
Jesus provides the fullest, most accurate revelation of God — His love, justice, mercy, and plan for salvation.
If you want, I can make a short list of the top 5 most common misperceptions of God in the OT and how Jesus corrects them — very easy to remember and share.
Do you want me to do that?
A list of Pastor Joseph Prince comparison of under law and under grace
Good question. Here’s a comparison list of key ideas Pastor Joseph Prince teaches about “under the Law” vs “under Grace”, based on his sermons and writings:
Joseph Prince: Law vs Grace — Key Comparisons
| Topic | What Joseph Prince Says Under the Law | What Joseph Prince Says Under Grace |
|---|---|---|
| Source | Law was “given through Moses” (John 1:17) | Grace “came through Jesus Christ” (John 1:17) |
| Nature / Character | Impersonal, demands obedience | Personal — grace is not just a teaching but a Person (Jesus) |
| Justification | Under the law, righteousness is expected through works | Under grace, righteousness is a gift received by faith, not achieved by works |
| Morality / The Ten Commandments | The Law reveals God’s moral standard; it’s holy and good | Grace upholds the goodness of the commandments, but empowers believers by love to fulfill them inwardly |
| Miracles / Outcomes | According to some of his illustrations, law brings “miracles of death” (because of condemnation) | Grace brings “miracles of life” (restoration, healing, transformation) |
| Sins & Forgiveness | Under the law, sins are remembered, and there is a pattern of punishment / judgment | Under grace, sins are forgiven and “remembered no more” (Hebrews-style promise) |
| Blessings vs Curses | The law dispenses blessings & curses based on obedience / disobedience | Under grace, the emphasis is on blessings, because of Christ’s finished work |
| Qualification | Under the law, one fails / is disqualified by disobedience, because no one is perfect | Under grace, a believer is qualified because of Jesus’ perfect obedience — not their own |
| Discipline / Correction | The law convicts sin sharply; it condemns when unfulfilled | Correction still exists under grace, but it comes “saturated with love, grace, and wisdom.” |
| Freedom / Relationship | Law is about “do this, don’t do that” — external demands | Under grace, believers are set free; grace “supplies” rather than demands, and God writes His laws on our hearts (Hebrews 8:10 as used by JP) |
| Falling from Grace | He warns that “falling” doesn’t mean losing salvation by sinning, but relying on your own effort again | When people try to earn God’s favor by works, they “fall from grace” — meaning they reject the finished work of Jesus |
Additional Notes / Clarifications
- Prince strongly emphasizes that grace does not abolish morality. True grace, in his teaching, actually produces holiness: “only grace can produce moral excellence in your life.”
- He argues that mixing “law + grace” is dangerous: if you combine them, you weaken both.
- Yet, he also clarifies that discipline under grace is real. God corrects us, but not with condemnation—rather with patient, loving instruction (like a father).
If you like, I can also include criticisms of Joseph Prince’s “law vs grace” teaching (some people say he leans toward hyper‑grace) — would you like that?
Great question. Here are some of the main criticisms (and theological concerns) people raise about Joseph Prince’s “under grace” teaching, especially regarding his “hyper-grace” message. These don’t necessarily mean all his teaching is wrong, but they are common points raised by pastors, theologians, and Christian critics:
Criticisms of Joseph Prince’s “Law vs Grace” / “Hyper-Grace” Teaching
-
Antinomianism (Lawlessness)
- Many critics accuse him of promoting antinomianism — the idea that under grace, Christians are freed from any obligation to obey moral law.
- According to some, he suggests that the Ten Commandments and moral laws no longer apply to believers.
-
Downplaying Sin, Repentance, and Confession
- Some say his teaching minimizes the necessity of ongoing confession and repentance because of his emphasis that “all sins — past, present, future — are forgiven.”
- Critics argue that he discourages recognition of sin and a humble, repentant heart, which are central in the New Testament.
-
“Cheap Grace”
- He’s been accused of preaching a “cheap grace” — where Christians may feel no real cost in following Jesus.
- Some argue that this weakens the ethical demands of Christianity and can lead to a lax approach to holiness.
-
Neglecting the Old Testament Grace
- Critics say Prince’s strict “law = OT, grace = NT” dichotomy is false: there was grace in the Old Covenant too.
- Some argue he misrepresents how God worked under the Law, ignoring many examples of grace and mercy in the OT.
-
Misunderstanding the Function of the Law
- According to some, Prince teaches that the Law is only condemning and no longer has any constructive role in a Christian’s life.
- Critics argue the Law should still serve as a “mirror” to expose sin, driving people to value grace, not discard law altogether.
-
Ignoring “Costly Grace” Teaching of Jesus
- Some say Jesus’ call to discipleship (e.g., in the Sermon on the Mount) reflects “costly grace” — not a “no-cost, no-repentance” gospel. Prince is accused of downplaying that.
-
Mystical / Personal Revelation
- There are criticisms around his claims of personal, direct revelation from God (“new revelation of grace”), which some say goes beyond objective biblical teaching.
-
Spiritual Abuse / False Assurance
- Some pastors warn that a “hyper-grace” teaching can lead to spiritual complacency, where people feel no real conviction for sin because they believe they are permanently forgiven.
- There is concern that people may think they can live any way without serious repentance or transformation.
Why These Criticisms Matter
- Balance: Grace is central to the gospel, but critics argue it must be balanced with truth about sin, repentance, and obedience.
- Sanctification: Some believe that without a proper understanding of the Law, Christians may neglect spiritual growth.
- Gospel Integrity: Critics worry that downplaying repentance and moral responsibility could distort the gospel into a “feel-good message” rather than a life-transforming one.
If you like, I can compare Joseph Prince’s “hyper-grace” teaching with other mainstream grace theologies (like Free Grace, New Covenant Theology, or Reformed grace) — to show where he is similar or differs. Do you want me to do that?
Good question. Here’s a comparison of Joseph Prince’s “hyper‑grace” teaching with Free Grace theology, New Covenant Theology (NCT), and Reformed grace theology, showing where they overlap and where they differ — plus some strengths and critiques.
Comparison: Joseph Prince vs Other Grace Theologies
| Theology / Movement | Key Characteristics | How Joseph Prince (Hyper‑Grace) Compares |
|---|---|---|
| Free Grace Theology | - Emphasizes eternal security by faith alone. - Distinguishes justification (salvation) from sanctification (growth). - Believes believers won’t lose salvation; sin doesn’t disqualify them for heaven. - Often warns against “lordship salvation” (needing to submit to Christ’s lordship to be saved). |
- Many Free Grace theologians think Prince is “basically with us.” - He strongly emphasizes salvation by faith, not works. - However, critics in the Free Grace camp argue that Prince doesn’t clearly distinguish between positional forgiveness and fellowship forgiveness. - Some say he minimizes the role of temporal judgment or discipline (“free grace” without consequences). |
| New Covenant Theology (NCT) | - Sees a strong discontinuity between the Old Covenant (Law) and the New Covenant (Grace). - Believes the Mosaic Law is not binding on New Testament believers. - Emphasizes the “already but not yet” aspects of salvation and sanctification. |
- Prince’s teaching is very similar in some respects — he strongly teaches that Christians “are no longer under the Law but under grace.” - But some NCT theologians may feel he overemphasizes ease, neglecting the full biblical call to holiness, repentance, and discipleship. For example, critics accuse him of reducing Christian life to “resting in positional righteousness” rather than growing in spiritual maturity. - Some say his message borders on “effortless grace,” which can downplay the role of spiritual discipline. |
| Reformed Theology (“Calvinist Grace”) | - Emphasizes God’s sovereignty, election, and perseverance of the saints. - Believes in sanctification (growing in holiness) as part of the Christian life. - Holds that the Law still has a role (as a moral guide) even though believers are not under the Mosaic Covenant in the same way. |
- Many Reformed critics argue Prince leans too far in favor of cheap grace. Bishop Paul Barker (Anglican / Gospel Coalition) calls his teaching “simplistic” and dangerous because of his insufficient teaching on discipleship, ethical demands, and biblical nuance. - Reformed theologians like George Ong criticize Prince for “smuggling” grace into all corners of Scripture, interpreting nearly every text through the lens of grace while minimizing other biblical themes (“obedience, repentance, holiness”). - Some argue that Prince’s “no obedience gospel” distorts Reformed truth: salvation should result in real, ongoing obedience (not just positional forgiveness). |
Strengths & Risks in Prince’s Grace Teaching (in Light of These Views)
Strengths:
- His teaching makes grace very accessible — pointing believers to assurance in Christ, not performance.
- He emphasizes positional righteousness: believers are permanently forgiven, not under condemnation.
- He encourages growth (sanctification) under grace, not legalism.
Risks / Criticisms:
- Some say his message can lead to “antinomianism” — dismissing moral law and ethical obedience.
- Others say he downplays repentance, confession, and biblical discipline.
- There’s concern he relies on subjective revelations (he claims new insight directly from God) that may elevate his teaching above Scripture.
- Reformed critics say his grace overwhelms biblical balance, reducing Christianity to a “soft, soothing ideology” rather than a call to costly discipleship.
My Conclusion / Reflection
- Joseph Prince’s teaching overlaps significantly with Free Grace and New Covenant Theology in its emphasis on unmerited favor and “no condemnation.”
- However, he goes further (in critics’ view) by minimizing the ongoing cost of following Christ, repentance, and moral holiness — which concerns Reformed theologians and others who emphasize the transformative nature of grace.
- Whether one agrees with him or not, his teaching has undeniably made the concept of grace more understandable and liberating to many, but also raised serious theological debates about how to live under grace rightly.
If you like, I can point you toward books or articles that critically evaluate Joseph Prince’s theology (both pro and con) so you can dig deeper.
