Discussion Questions

Dean Taylor says conservative writers sometimes “were not consistent or even honest with the New Testament,” while liberal writers “were not honest with the Old Testament”; where do you feel that tension in your own instincts about God, and what does the chapter force you to stop “explaining away”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Taylor says conservatives can twist the New Testament and liberals can twist the Old Testament. Where do you feel that pull in your own view of God, and what does this chapter make you stop explaining away?

The chapter insists the Old Testament portrays God as a warrior (Exodus 15:3) and not a pacifist; what do you think Taylor wants you to conclude about God’s character from that label, and what parts of modern Christian speech about God does it directly challenge? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The chapter says the Old Testament shows God as a warrior, not a pacifist. What do you think Taylor wants you to learn about what God is like, and what common Christian ways of talking about God does this challenge?

Taylor argues that even “Thou shalt not kill” doesn’t erase the Old Testament’s sanctioned violence because it addresses unlawful murder and sits alongside “eye for an eye”; how does that observation change the way you read commandments—especially when you’ve used a verse to settle a moral question quickly? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Taylor says “Do not kill” is about illegal murder, and it sits next to “eye for an eye,” so it doesn’t erase Old Testament violence. How does that change how you read commands, especially when you use one verse to quickly answer a moral question?

In Isaiah’s vision, holiness produces collapse: “Woe is me… I am undone”; when Taylor says God’s holiness made him feel “everything about me was deficient,” what do you think a real encounter with God’s holiness would expose in a serious Christian community (speech, identity, “people group”), and what do we typically do to avoid that exposure? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Isaiah fell apart when he saw God’s holiness. If a church really faced God’s holiness, what sins or blind spots would it bring out (in how we talk, who we are, and group loyalties), and how do we usually try to avoid seeing that?

Moses’ “show me Your glory” ends up with God defining Himself by attributes rather than appearance; what do you learn about what God considers most important to reveal about Himself, and how does that confront the way we evaluate “knowing God” today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When Moses asks to see God’s glory, God describes His character instead of His looks. What does that show about what God most wants us to know about Him, and how does that challenge how we think about “knowing God” today?

Taylor fixates on the line, “will by no means clear the guilty,” concluding that God “will not just overlook sin”; how does that claim collide with common evangelical instincts about assurance, forgiveness, and “moving on,” and where might your own theology have quietly trained you to expect God to shrug at sin? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Taylor focuses on “will not clear the guilty,” saying God won’t just ignore sin. How does that clash with common ideas about assurance, forgiveness, and just “moving on,” and where have you come to expect God to shrug at sin?

God names Himself “Jealous,” and Taylor says this sounds closer to “warrior” than “all-inclusive”; what do you think God’s jealousy is protecting, and what modern loyalties (family expectations, political identity, personal freedom, comfort) does the chapter imply God will actually go to war against? JumpstartAnother way to ask: God calls Himself “Jealous,” and Taylor says that sounds more like “warrior” than “everyone is included.” What do you think God’s jealousy is guarding, and which modern loyalties does the chapter suggest God will fight against?

Taylor argues the paradox resolves this way: God’s nature doesn’t change, but the “means” and “battle plan” do; what does it mean to say the New Covenant changes “how we serve God” rather than who God is, and where are you tempted to use “Jesus changed things” to avoid the Old Testament’s God? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Taylor says God doesn’t change, but His way of acting does under the New Covenant. What does it mean that the New Covenant changes how we serve God, not who God is, and where do you use “Jesus changed things” to avoid the Old Testament picture of God?

Jesus’ examples—rebuking James and John for wanting Elijah-style fire, and stopping Peter with “all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword”—are presented as a “complete metamorphosis” in warfare; what kinds of “weapons” do Christians still reach for when opposed or disrespected, and how would Jesus’ rebuke (“you do not know what manner of spirit you are of”) land on us? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Jesus stopped the use of violence in the stories about James and John and about Peter. What “weapons” do Christians still use when we feel attacked or disrespected, and how would Jesus’ warning about having the wrong spirit apply to us?

Tertullian’s early-church conclusion is blunt: “the Lord has taken the sword away… disarmed every soldier,” and Taylor says “the whole idea of a Christian just war grew… ridiculous,” then asks what the church believed before Augustine; based on the chapter’s argument and timeline gap, what do you think early Christians assumed about violence and discipleship, and what would you have to surrender (practically, not theoretically) to live as if they were right? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Tertullian said Jesus took away the sword, and Taylor says early Christians didn’t believe in Christian war before Augustine. What do you think early Christians believed about violence and following Jesus, and what real-life things would you have to give up to live like they were right?