God in the Old and New Testament: One Unchanging Nature
This paper argues that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are one and the same, countering scholarly claims that the two portrayals represent fundamentally different divine characters. Drawing on scriptural evidence from both Testaments, the paper examines God's unchanging metaphysical attributes—eternality, omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience—as well as His moral attributes of trustworthiness, righteousness, and goodness. A focused exegesis of Exodus 3:14–15, in which God declares Himself "I am Who am," demonstrates that the self-revealing God of Moses is identical to the Christ of the New Testament. The paper concludes that perceived contradictions between the two Testaments reflect interpretive bias rather than any genuine change in God's nature.
- Introduction: Thesis: God's nature is unchanged across Testaments
- Background: Competing Scholarly Views: Scholars debate God's differing portrayals in each Testament
- Metaphysical Attributes of God: Eternality, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience across both Testaments
- Moral Attributes of God: God's faithfulness, righteousness, and goodness remain constant
- Exegesis of Exodus 3:14–15: I am Who am links Old and New Testament God
- Conclusion: Interpretive bias, not divine change, explains perceived contradictions
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its theological argument in direct scriptural citations from both Testaments, placing parallel passages side by side to show continuity rather than asserting it abstractly.
- It engages real scholarly counterarguments (Seibert, Wright) before refuting them, giving the essay intellectual credibility and a genuine sense of dialogue.
- The exegesis of Exodus 3:14–15 serves as a strong organizational anchor, tying together the metaphysical and moral attribute sections and linking back to the New Testament's "I am" statements in John.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative biblical exegesis: it selects a single foundational passage (Exodus 3:14–15) and traces its theological resonance across multiple books of both Testaments, using the passage as a lens through which all other scriptural evidence is interpreted. This technique shows how a close reading of one text can illuminate an entire theological argument.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens with an introduction that states the thesis and outlines the paper's plan. A background section presents both sides of the scholarly debate. The body is divided into two parallel analytical sections—metaphysical attributes and moral attributes—each internally organized by sub-attribute (e.g., omnipotence, righteousness). An exegesis section then applies the analysis to a specific text. The conclusion synthesizes the findings and returns to the thesis, noting that apparent contradictions reflect the interpreter's disposition rather than any change in God's character.
Introduction
The God of the Old Testament has been viewed by many scholars as fundamentally different from the God of the New Testament. This mischaracterization is often produced by placing emphasis on God's insistence in the Old Testament that infidels be dealt with in a bloody manner (Deuteronomy 9:4–5), whereas God in the New Testament appears to preach mercy, charity, and turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:38–40). Yet what these scholars fail to appreciate is that the God of the New Testament is equally insistent on due respect being shown to Him: after all, it is Christ who literally drives the money changers out of the Temple with a whip because they are desecrating the sanctity of the place (John 2:15). It is therefore inaccurate to suppose that the God of the Old Testament is different from the God of the New Testament.
The God of the Old Testament is just as merciful and insistent upon charity as the God of the New Testament.2 The Psalms are filled with a sense of God's love, mercy, and protective nature. The stories of Ruth and of Jonah—sent to preach to the Ninevites—are both examples of God showing a divine interest in supporting those who are not of the "chosen" people. This paper further explains how God is the same God in both Testaments. It first provides contextual information, presenting arguments from both sides of the debate. It then examines the metaphysical attributes of God, the moral attributes of God, and offers an exegesis of Exodus 3:14–15, with particular focus on God's declaration "I am Who am," which shows that God's nature is unchanging and eternal.
The findings of this research show that God's character has never changed from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation: it is complete but complex.3 God is love and has created the world because of this, but He also demands submission to His will and does not force His grace upon those who reject Him and His ways. Whether it is Job's friends questioning God's reasons for sending suffering to the righteous Job, or the Jews questioning Christ about His divinity—those who reject Him are always the same: full of self-love and pride.
Background: Competing Scholarly Views
Scholars who claim that the God of the Old Testament is different from the God of the New Testament tend to argue that the Old Testament God is violent, wrathful, uncharitable, and persecuting.4 Wright contends, for instance, that the God of the Old Testament is embittered against His enemies and that the language used to describe Him reflects an adversarial tone common to the literature of the times.5 In other words, the writers of the Old Testament were not so much representing the character of God as they were expressing their own animosity toward other tribes—or so Wright argues.
The other side of the argument holds that skeptics fail to reckon with what God actually demands of humankind: respect, love, and adoration. He is not a sentimental or new-age God. He is realistic and knows full well the evil in the world, which is why Christ gave the example of fasting and praying in the desert as a means of resisting temptation. Paul Copan argues that those who find God's attitude toward the Canaanites problematic likely fail to see how they themselves might resemble the Canaanites in their own attitude toward God.6 Craig likewise argues that God's actions are always dictated by His love, no matter how harsh or cold they may appear to some.7 In short, it is not always given to man to know the mind of God; rather, man should trust that God has his best interests at heart, and moments of suffering or seeming cruelty can be a test of faithfulness rather than a demonstration of God's lack of love.8
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.