Newsflash: The New Testament is Shorter

Call me Captain Obvious if you like, but the New Testament is shorter than the Old Testament. I was thinking about this the other day and it occurred to me that in some sense the length of the two covenant documents speaks to the relationship between the covenants themselves and what is required of the people who are part of those covenants.
Simply asking the question, 'Why is the New Testament shorter?' helps us to see the nature of the covenants in contrast. For example, here are at least two parts of the answer that I would give you to that question:
1. There are no genealogies in the New Testament
One of the things that makes the Old Testament longer is the accumulation of stories of family lines. So, for example, the story of Judah and Tamar in Genesis 38 is vital because it records God's preservation of the line of Judah. The Old Testament is filled with both genealogies and narratives that preserve bloodlines.
The New Testament, on the other hand, has no genealogies (except for that of Jesus, which is the climax of the Old Testament). There are no stories of fathers and children, no stories of family lines being preserved.
This makes the New Testament shorter. It also illustrates one of the fundamental differences between the covenants. The older covenant was passed on from generation to generation through bloodlines and families (Gen 15.3-5), while the newer is passed on through gospel proclamation and faith (2 Tim 2.2). Therefore, the New Testament simply has the book of Acts which records how the gospel was proclaimed and believed. That's all there is for narrative. There is no ongoing record of families which must be saved because God's people will now be made up of 'all nations' as they become disciplines... adopted children.
2. There is no case law in the New Testament
A second reason why the Old Testament is longer is because Moses and many prophets after him are forced to belabour the teaching of the Law in any and every imaginable context (and even some rather unimaginable ones!). Every time I read through the Old Testament I'm amazed at some of the case law and think to myself, 'Really? Someone did that? And they needed to set a precedent law against it?'
In the New Testament, however, there is a distinct lack of laws (note: I didn't say distinct lack of Law). You would think that as the New Covenant was being received and applied across cultural boundaries and geographical regions and religious backgrounds there would be a lot more Acts 15-type-moments. But in reality, there aren't, simply because the New Covenant isn't about setting case law. That's not the nature of this covenant.
For example, when the Corinthians ask Paul about whether or not they are free to eat meat sacrificed to idols, he does not deliver case law that is binding on all Christians. Rather, he holds up the ideal of freedom and then allows it to be swallowed up by the law of love so that individual Christians simply cannot answer the ethical question without coming face to face with the question, 'What is love and am I willing to be governed by it?' (see 1 Corinthians 8-10). He does the same thing again when it comes to the exercise of spiritual gifts (see 1 Corinthians 12-14). Love is the law that governs all of Christian behaviour in the New Testament (John 13.34-35).
And so it is written...
When you've only got one law that trumps in any and every situation, and you don't have to record genealogies and family histories spanning thousands of years, you can write a much shorter covenant document. Which is precisely what we have.
How Do You Feel About Predestination?

Abraham & Isaac
The doctrine of God's electing individuals to salvation, apart from any good in them (either actual or foreseen) is known as unconditional election (o predestination). It is exemplified in Isaac's twin sons: '...when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger." As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated"' (Romans 9.10-13).
Predestination is a doctrine that is often at the centre of controversy. And too often the controversy could be quelled, if not quenched, by a calm tongue and a gentle answer (Prov 15.1). But too much of the time those who believe the most strongly in predestination are (rightly or wrongly) associated with pride and arrogance and preachiness, rather than humility, gentleness, and love.
But that should never be.
That's just one of the reasons why I loved reading this in the 1689 London Baptist Confession of faith the other day:
The doctrine of the high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending the will of God revealed in his Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election; so shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel. (1 Thessalonians 1:4, 5; 2 Peter 1:10; Ephesians 1:6; Romans 11:33; Romans 11:5, 6, 20; Luke 10:20)
That's a big mouthful, but basically it's saying that this isn't a doctrine to be wielded like an ax, to wound our enemies, but should be applied carefully, like a balm to give courage to wounded souls, and like a call to worship for those who embrace it and are humbled by God's grace. For those who know the doctrines of grace and love them, this should be the very thing which calls forth our humility and our worship like nothing else. It should never be a source of pride and it is not a doctrine to be handled flippantly.
So how do you feel about predestination? Does it make you condemn those who don't understand it? Or does it make you marvel at God's mercy?
On Every Page, Behind Every Line
The Big Question
Regardless of what age or part of the world you live in, one of the most central questions of the Christian faith is this: 'Who is Jesus? Is he really God? Does the New Testament really teach that?' While every orthodox believer quickly and heartily affirms that Jesus is in fact divine, many believers struggle with how exactly to prove that to friends & neighbours.

An ancient manuscript
While the New Testament does at times simply refer to Jesus as God (see the list here), frankly, it can be hard sometimes for many Christians to find passages that express as clearly and succinctly as we would like that Jesus is God. That's in large part because the writers of the New Testament simply were not writing a systematic theology. They were writing to real people with real life problems and real church problems. So what we find is that more often than not the New Testament authors are addressing life's issues in such a way that presumes the deity of Christ, without necessarily spelling it out for us.
The Basic Truth
So it's kind of like me writing to you about how to play hockey. I may write about learning to shoot, pass, block shots, throw body checks, win faceoffs, and maybe even skate, but all the while I might not explicitly state that ice is actually frozen water. It's understood. It's the basis of all that we're doing. You can't play hockey without ice (at least not real hockey), and you can't live as a Christian without knowing that Jesus is God.
All that being said, on every page, behind every line, this majestic truth stands: Jesus is the promised incarnation of God, the Son of God, the one who reigns. He himself is to be worshiped and served as God, because he is God. And that truth is everywhere, upholding and undergirding everything.
Here's one little example from the passage we studied last week at GFC (1 Pet 5.1-4). In that passage, Peter admonishes elders to 'shepherd the flock of God that is among you' in a way that honours and pleases God, since all will be called to account. In particular, those who shepherd in this way will 'receive the unfading crown of glory' at the end of all things. Why? Because they have represented the true Shepherd, the 'chief Shepherd,' Jesus Christ.
You can read that quickly and move on, or you can stop and ponder what it means that Peter has just called Jesus the 'chief Shepherd' when he thought about the 'flock of God.' Those images are loaded with meaning from the Old Testament.
The Necessary Background
Psalm 78.52 says that, in the Exodus, '[God] led out his people like sheep and guided them in the wilderness like a flock.' As you follow the Bible's storyline it's not long before you get to passages like Jeremiah 23-25 and Ezekiel 9 which speak words of condemnation on those who were supposed to be shepherds of God's people (cf. Zech 10.3). Because they failed, the flock was scattered in exile. When the prophets speak of a return from exile, notice the language that is used:
I will surely assemble all of you, O Jacob; I will gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men. (Micah 2.12)
Like the first Exodus, this return from exile will be an expression of God's deliverance, bringing his people, like a flock, to himself. But here's what's so significant: It is always Yahweh himself who will come as Shepherd. It is clear that when this great Shepherd comes to gather God's people, it will be none other than God himself who brings the deliverance.
But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days. Therefore he shall give them up until the time when she who is in labour has given birth; then the rest of his brothers shall return to the people of Israel. And he shall stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God. And they shall dwell secure, for now he shall be great to the ends of the earth. (Micah 5.2-4)
Go on up to a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good news; lift up your voice with strength, O Jerusalem, herald of good news; lift it up, fear not; say to the cities of Judah, “Behold your God!” Behold, the Lord GOD comes with might, and his arm rules for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him. He will tend his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young. (Isaiah 40:9-11)
"Hear the word of the LORD, O nations, and declare it in the coastlands far away; say, 'He who scattered Israel will gather him, and will keep him as a shepherd keeps his flock.' (Jer 31.10)
As a shepherd seeks out his flock when he is among his sheep that have been scattered, so will I seek out my sheep, and I will rescue them from all places where they have been scattered on a day of clouds and thick darkness. ... And you are my sheep, human sheep of my pasture, and I am your God, declares the Lord GOD." (Ezek 34.12; 31)
So behind Peter's simple statement that the 'chief Shepherd' is Jesus lies a whole theology of the deity of Jesus, the Promised Divine Shepherd, the one who brings the deliverance of God's people in the true Exodus. It's on every page, in every line, behind every thought. Jesus is God.
Our Big Problem
But perhaps, in light of this example (and so many others like it), the reason why we don't see the deity of Christ in the New Testament as clearly as we ought is not because we do not know our New Testament, but because we do not know the Old Testament like we ought. So here's a suggestion: If you want to get to know Jesus better and see him more clearly, as the New Testament authors saw him, maybe you need to read your Old Testament more.
Does the New Testament Refer to Jesus as ‘God’?

Does the New Testament ever simply refer to Jesus as 'God'? Absolutely! Though it is not the usual manner of asserting the divinity of Jesus (see here for a discussion of the diverse ways the NT speaks of Jesus as God), yet the NT does on several occasions simply ascribe to him the title 'theos' (the Greek word for 'God' typically reserved for God the Father).
Many texts are debated as to whether or not Jesus is referred to as theos (θεός), but the ones which most certainly do refer to Jesus as are as follows (taken from the ESV):
John 1.1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 20.28: Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
Rom 9.5: To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
Titus 2.11-13: For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age,waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
Heb 1.8: But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
2 Pet 1.1: Simeon a Peter, a servant b and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.
There are, of course, more texts which are debated, as to whether they refer to Jesus as Theos or not. The ones listed above are, however, the most certain grammatically, logically, and theologically.
I hope that bolsters your faith. The one we worship and serve, the one who saved us, the one for whose return we wait -- he is true, Almighty God!
For more discussion on the texts above and several other debated texts, see Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus (Baker Academic, 1998).
The Pendulum Drives Everything

A pendulum
The pendulum drives everything. Okay, maybe not everything, but most things.
What we perceive to be an excess in one direction drives us to correct the balance by moving in the other direction. Over and over and over. I've seen this in other people and I've seen it in myself.
The more we run from doctrinal error that we see in others, the more likely we are to fall into the opposite error ourselves. An over-the-top notion of male headship leads to the rise of feminism. An over-emphasis on the sovereignty of God leads to open theism. A preacher who makes a huge deal out of minor issues will eventually find that people stop listening to the things which actually are important. If my friends discipline their kids too much, I want to bring balance to the universe by letting my kids run wild.
For every wrong over-emphasis there is an equal and opposite corresponding over-emphasis in the other direction. More often than not when I have made a theological move it has been as much about moving away from something I perceived to be wrong as it is moving toward something I perceived to be right. That's not entirely wrong, but I think it does warrant caution.
It has made me want to move slower and ask more questions.
- Is the content of the position really erroneous or has it just been given inappropriate weight?
- If I am moving from an extreme position, am I moving to an extreme position? Is there a middle-ground?
- What is good in the position I'm rejecting that I stand to lose?
- If I'm rejecting something because I feel like I don't like it, why do I feel like that?
- Who am I following? Are they prone to unnecessary extremes?
- Does the measure of my passion for this issue reflect the Bible's passion for and clarity on this issue?
I don't know. Maybe I'm just getting old and mellow. But it seems to me that if we're always moving between extremes, we're probably passing the truth somewhere in the middle every time. And if I'm just always stuck on the same extreme, I'm probably always just as far away from the truth as I was before.
The trick, I think, is to be pulled to truth like a magnet to its pole rather than to be pulled away from extremes to opposite extremes. Easy to say, harder to live.
I pray that God, by his grace, would allow me to cultivate a deep enough longing for truth in my heart that I would pursue truth out of an ever-increasingly-pure and purified mind that is willing to be wrong, willing to change, willing to believe what I may not like at first, and willing to stay put even when it seems like it would be nicer to change camps.
And I also pray that he would give me friends who observe me carefully and tell me when I'm just over-reacting.
------------
** This is written as part of the series 30 for 30: Reflections on Life at My 30th Birthday **