Is God really angry?

This is going to be a really long thread I am supposing...We have for the last 200 years have had nothing but preaching on the judgment of God rather then the love of God. Why is God so angry? Is He angry because we sin? After all are we not "predestined to be conformed into the image of His dear Son". If that is true, then it would be foolish for God to get angry, after all He is far more intelligent then us puny humans with our limited imaginations.We have? Seems to me the opposite is true.Is He angry because we sin?Exactly!After all are we not "predestined to be conformed into the image of His dear Son" That is true but doesn't apply to what you are talking about here nor does the follow up, that it's 'foolish'?! of God to get angry?I am convinced that God is not angry as we suppose. I am confident that God is NOT angry with sinners nor is He angry with saints.Surely this is not what scripture teaches.The sinner has not chosen to live in darkness, but rather they were born in it, they like us, were shapen in iniquity. Why must the sinner be punished for what one man did? No, they, you, us, we all choose to disobey and sin against God and that makes us responsible and accountable. You have a complete misunderstanding of the nature of sin. This whole thing is wrought with problems, hard to know where to begin. Am all for balance but this is way off. This seems to be a theology by patchwork and being tempted to answer it in that same way is not going to help anything. Will let our more learned members see if they can't help you here.

Sounds alot like the "God is not mad and has a wonderful plan for your life gospel". It seems to me that's what we've been hearing ALOT more than God's judgement in recent years.

Perhaps this might be of some help:The Nature of sin - WHAT IS SIN????

Karl,There is still a huge gap in your theology here.There is a vast difference between a sinner and a wicked person.Where do you find that?A wicked person is someone who has knowledge of God, who had an encounter with God, (hence the nature of Satan) but totally rejects the message of salvation to him. Hebrews 6:7-8It seems that you are trying to take certain verses and make them into blanket statements. All these things have to be taken with the consideration of the context of which they were spoken in and measured with and against the whole of scripture. What you are doing is esogesis, not exegesis.

Instead of us making a convenant with God, in which we couldn't keep in the first place, Christ bearing record that we shouldn't even make a vow. If the vows were removed from the marriage ceremony alot more marriages would not see divorce, we simply cannot keep a vow.Just thought of an 11 page 'pamphlet' by A. W. Tozer when I read this above quote from your post. Please take the time to prayerfully read this. (I'll take the plunge and post my first huge run-on post). Forgive me."Five Vows for Spiritual Power Affirmations for Personal Revival By A.W. TozerSOME PEOPLE OBJECT to taking vows, but in the Bible you will find many great men of God directed by covenants, promises, vows and pledges. The psalmist was not averse to the taking of vows: “Thy vows are upon me, O God,” he said. “I will render my praises unto thee” (Psalm 56:12).My counsel in this matter is that if you are really concerned about spiritual improvement—the gaining of new power, new life, new joy and new personal revival within your heart—you will do well to make certain vows and proceed to keep them. If you should fail, go down in humility and repent and start over. But always keep these vows before you. They will help harmonize your heart with the vast powers that flow out and down from the throne where Christ sits at the right hand of God.A carnal man refuses the discipline of such commitments. He says, “I want to be free. I don’t want to lay any vows upon myself; I don’t believe in it. It is legalism.” Well, let me paint a picture of two men.One of them will not take vows. He will not accept any responsibility. He wants to be free. And he is free, in a measure—just as a tramp is free. The tramp is free to sit on a park bench by day, sleep on a newspaper by night, get chased out of town on Thursday morning, and find his way up a set of creaky stairs in some flophouse on Thursday night. Such a man is free, but he is also useless. He clutters up the world whose air he breathes.Let’s look at another man—maybe a president or prime minister or any great man who carries upon himself the weight of government. Such men are not free. But in the sacrifice of their freedom they step up their power. If they insist upon being free, they can be free, just like the tramp. But they choose rather to be bound.There are many religious tramps in the world who will not be bound by anything. They have turned the grace of God into personal license. But the great souls are ones who have gone reverently to God with the understanding that in their flesh dwells no good thing. And they know that without God’s enablement any vows taken would be broken before sundown. Nevertheless, believing in God, reverently they took certain sacred vows. This is the way of spiritual power.Now there are five vows I have in mind which we do well to make and keep. The first is: Deal thoroughly with sin. Sin has been driven underground these days and has come up with a new name and face. You may be subjected to this phenomenon in the schools. Sin is being called by various fancy names—anything but what it really is. For example, men don’t get under conviction any more; they get a guilt complex. Instead of confessing their guilt to God and getting rid of it, they lie on a couch and try to tell a man who ought to know better all about themselves. It comes out after a while that they were deeply disappointed when they were two years old or some such thing. That’s supposed to make them better.The whole thing is ridiculous, because sin is still the ancient enemy of the soul. It has never changed. We’ve got to deal firmly with sin in our lives. Let’s remember that. “The kingdom of God is not meat and drink,” said Paul, “but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost” (Romans 14:17). Righteousness lies at the door of the kingdom of God. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Ezekiel 18:4, 20).This is not to preach sinless perfection. This is to say that every known sin is to be named, identified and repudiated, and that we must trust God for deliverance from it, so that there is no conscious, deliberate sin anywhere in our lives. It is absolutely necessary that we deal thus, because God is a holy God and sin is on the throne of the world.So don’t call your sins by some other name. If you’re jealous, call it jealousy. If you tend to pity yourself and feel that you are not appreciated, but are like a flower born to blush unseen and waste your sweetness on the desert air, call it what it is—self-pity.There is resentfulness. If you’re resentful, admit it. I have met people who live in a state of sputtering indignation most of the time. I know of a preacher who acts like a hen thrown out of the nest. He keeps running in all directions clucking and complaining—somebody is always doing him wrong. Well, if you have got that spirit, you must deal with it now. You must get that out of you. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses from all sin. Instead of covering it up and trying to find a Greek marginal rendering somewhere to hide it under, call it by its right name and get rid of it by the grace of God.And then there is your temper. Don’t call it indignation. Don’t try to christen it by some other name. Call it what it is. Because if you have a bad temper you will either get rid of it or it will get rid of much of your spirituality and most of your joy.So let’s deal with sin thoroughly. Let’s be perfectly candid. God loves candid people.Now the second vow is: Never own anything. I do not mean by this that you cannot have things. I mean that you ought to get delivered from the sense of possessing them. This sense of possessing is what hinders us. All babies are born with their fists clenched, and it seems to me it means: “This is mine!” One of the first things they say is “mine” in an angry voice. That sense of “This is mine” is a very injurious thing to the spirit. If you can get rid of it so that you have no feeling of possessing anything, there will come a great sense of freedom and liberty into your life.Now don’t think that you must sell all that you have and give it to charity. No, God will let you have your car and your business, your practice and your position, whatever it may be, provided you understand that it is not yours at all, but His, and all you are doing is just working for Him. You can be restful about it then, because we never need to worry about losing anything that belongs to someone else. If it is yours, you’re always looking in your hand to see if it’s still there. If it’s God’s you no longer need to worry about it.Let me point out some things you’ll have to turn over to God. Property is one thing. Some of the dear Lord’s children are being held back because there’s a ball and chain on their legs. If it’s a man, it’s his big car and fine home. If it’s a woman it’s her china and her Louis XIV furniture and all the rest. Take that vase for instance. There it stands, and if anybody knocked it off and broke it the poor owner would probably lose five years from her life!The third vow is this: Never defend yourself. We’re all born with a desire to defend ourselves. And if you insist upon defending yourself, God will let you do it. But if you turn the defense of yourself over to God He will defend you. He told Moses once, in Exodus 23:22: “I will be an enemy unto thine enemies and an adversary to thine adversaries.”A long time ago the Lord and I went through the twenty third chapter of Exodus together and He gave it to me. For thirty years now it has been a source of untold blessing to my life. I don’t have to fight. The Lord does the fighting for me. And He’ll do the same for you. He will be an enemy to Your enemy and an adversary to your adversary, and you’ll never need to defend yourself.What do we defend? Well, we defend our service, and particularly we defend our reputation. Your reputation is what people think you are, and if a story gets out about you the big temptation is to try to run it down. But you know, running down the source of a story is a hopeless task. Absolutely hopeless! It’s like trying to find the bird after you’ve found the feather on your lawn. You can’t do it. But if you’ll turn yourself wholly over to the Lord He will defend you completely and see to it that no one will harm you. “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper.” He says, and “every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn” (Isaiah 54:17).Henry Suso was a great Christian of other days. Once he was seeking what some Christians have told me they are seeking—to know God better. Let’s put it like this: you are seeking to have a religious awakening within your spirit that will thrust you farther out into the deep things of God. Well, as Henry Suso was seeking God, people started telling evil stories about the man, and it grieved him so that he wept bitter tears and had great sorrow of heart.Then one day he looked out the window and saw a dog playing on the lawn. The dog had a mat, and kept picking the mat up, tossing it over his shoulder, running and getting it, tossing it some more, picking it up and tossing it again. God said to Henry Suso, “That mat is your reputation, and I am letting the dogs of sin tear your reputation to shreds and toss it all over the lawn for your own good. One of these days things will change.”And things did change. It was not very long before people who were tearing his reputation were confounded, and Suso rose into a place that made him a power in his day and a great blessing still to those who sing his hymns and read his works.Next vow: Never pass anything on about anybody else that will hurt him. “Love covers a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8). The talebearer has no place in God’s favor. If you know something that would hinder or hurt the reputation of one of God’s children, bury it forever. Find a little garden out back a little spot somewhere—and when somebody comes around with an evil story, take it out and bury it, and say, “Here lies in peace the story about my brother.” God will take care of it. “With what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged” (Matthew 7:2).If you want God to be good to you, you are going to have to be good to His children. You say, “That’s not grace.” Well, grace gets you into the kingdom of God. That is unmerited favor. But after you are seated at the Father’s table He expects to teach you table manners. And He won’t let you eat unless you obey the etiquette of the table. And what is that? The etiquette of the table is that you don’t tell stories about the brother who is sitting at the table with you—no matter what his denomination, or nationality or background.Our next vow is: Never accept any glory. God is jealous of His glory and Hewill not give His glory to another. He will not even share His glory with another. It is quite natural, I should say, for people to hope that maybe their Christian service will give them a chance to display their talents. True, they want to serve the Lord. But they also want other people to know they are serving the Lord. They want to have a reputation among the saints. That is very dangerous ground—seeking a reputation among the saints. It’s bad enough to seek a reputation in the world, but it’s worse to seek a reputation among the people of God, Our Lord gave up His reputation, and so must we.Meister Eckhart once preached a sermon on Christ cleansing the temple. He said, “Now there was nothing wrong with those men selling and buying there. There was nothing wrong with exchanging money there; it had to be. The sin lay in their doing it for profit. They got a percentage on serving the Lord.” And then he made the application: “Anybody that serves for a commission, for what little bit of glory he can get out of it, is a merchant and he ought to be cast out of the temple.”I go along with this. If you’re serving the Lord, and yet slyly—perhaps scarcely known to you—you’re hoping to get just a little five percent commission, then look out! It will chill the power of God in your spirit. You must determine that you will never take any glory, but see that God gets it all.Now the easiest possible thing is to give a message like this. The hard thing is to make it work in one’s own life. Remember that these five vows are not something you write in the back of your Bible and forget. They’ve got to be written in your own blood. They have to be made final, irrevocable. If it only comes off the surface it’s no good. Much of our promises come off the surface. No, no. Let it come out of the depths of your heart, the deep depths of your spirit.These vows cut against the old human nature. They introduce the cross into your life. And nobody ever walks back from carrying his cross—nobody, comes back. When you make these vows, remember: They introduce the cross into your life, they strike at the heart of your self-life and there is never a place to go back to. And I say, “Woe to the triflers!”In America—and maybe in other places, too—so many people are saying, “Try Jesus, try God!” Triflers, experimenters, tasters they are. Like a rabbit with a half dozen holes so if one is stopped up he can flee to another! No! From the cross there is no place to flee. You don’t “try” Jesus. He’s not there to be experimental with. Christ is not on trial. You are. I am. He’s not! God raised Him from the dead and forever confirmed His deity and sealed Him and set Him at His own right hand as Lord and Christ. Turn everything over to Him and you’ll find your life begin to lift. You’ll blossom in a wonderful way.Now, if you happen to be one of those on whom God had laid His hand for a deeper life, a more powerful life, a fuller life, then I wonder if you would be willing to pray this kind of prayer: “O God, glorify Thyself at my expense. Send me the bill—anything, Lord. I set no price. I will not dicker or bargain. Glorify Thyself, I’ll take the consequence .This kind of praying is simple, but it’s deep and wonderful and powerful. I believe, if you can pray a prayer like that, it will be the ramp from which you can take off into higher heights and bluer skies in the things of the Spirit."

A wicked person is someone who has knowledge of God, who had an encounter with God, Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them. Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. Isa 65:20 ... but the sinner [being] an hundred years old shall be accursed. Psa 7:11 God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry [with the wicked] every day. The word wicked is rasha` {raw-shaw'} and means 1) wicked, criminala) guilty one, one guilty of crime (subst)b) wicked (hostile to God)c) wicked, guilty of sin (against God or man)1John 3:4 for sin is the transgression of the law. A wicked person is one who is guilty of sin. Ex. Thou shalt not lie.

Thank you Josh.Recall this and a well put insert here.I do hope that we can all take it to heart. A great review to renew some vows, some that I found perfectly applicable personally.Christ is not on trial. You are. I am. He’s not! That sum's it up very well.

This is going absolutely nowhere. Where in the world did all these assumptions come from?No anger here whatsoever, just bemused by it all.One word that comes to mind is Hermeneutics, which if anything all this may prove beneficial in causing me to go back and study it again.In a nut shell it is the art and science of Biblical interpretation. And I hardly qualify as one that could even begin to teach it. But there has to be some basic understanding of the nature of things stated in scripture. Not legalism or just plain cold 'facts', of course it's a spiritual book. It is also a historical book and prose, proverbs, prophecy, etc., certainly that doesn't escape us. But this has so many tentacles and assumptions, what's with the straw man? It's all over the place and it's starting to border on the same argument of whether scripture is infallible or not. If we can't measure our experiences and what we think the Lord may be telling us against that standard, then we all would become a cult unto ourselves. That's not legalism.Originally this started as a statement that God was no longer angry and then went on to state the reasons why. I don't see any support at all to buttress that claim, nor do I see any real sense of just what anger and wrath might be meant by God, it is certainly beyond our comprehension and from what I can gather it stems out of His great love which as well is far beyond our ability to grasp. This all seems to be reducing God down to our level. If the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge that must encompass more than just reverence. What do you do with the wrath of the Lamb?Edit: Just as I was signing off this came via email;Christian Quotation of the DayFebruary 22, 2005 There are still those who would add to the faith human traditions and fancies, thus cluttering it up and obscuring it; and those who would take away from it, rejecting (often with little thought) whatever may seem to them to be out of harmony with the so-called modern mind; and others who would distort it, making it one way or another a pretext for injustice and oppression. But, if we are to be effective in contending for the faith against false teachings, we must certainly contend for it by striving ourselves to understand it ever more truly and more fully. ... C. E. B. Cranfield (b.1915), I & II Peter and Jude [1960] http://www.cqod.com/

To echo Mike's comments I would like to ask just what do you think the cross was all about? I recently heard a sermon by Rick Warren and his thesis was that God is not mad at you but mad about you. This reduces the cross to the raving actions of a deranged lover. The reason why God can have mercy on us is because His Son voluntarily stepped into our place to face our justly deserved wrath upon the cross. The cross was as much justice as it was mercy for on the cross justice and mercy met. Justice was satisfied and mercy flowed to all who will receive it.I would add that not only is God angry at sinners(us), but His anger at sin will never subside. Any sins I've committed years ago that made Him angry then, He's still angry at. Not only is He angry, He's infinitely angry, and He is also justly angry. I stand before Him guilty and without a defence as do all men. If I a finite man choose to stand alone in this wrath to pay an infinite price I would be altogether destroyed in Hell and forced to pay forever in the furnace of the wrath of a justly angered God. But the depth of the mercies of God are shown to me that while I was yet a sinner, Christ died for me. Only an infinite being could pay an infinite price, and for the joy set before Him he endured the cross, scorning it's shame, and became the only sacrifice that could satisfy the wrath of God and not only cover, but remove my sin. Yes God is angry with sinners, every day, and yes He loves them. That is our terror and our comfort. It is a deep thing to think that we who believe have been saved by God, for God, but also from God. Saved By Him for He is the only one who could pay the price, For Him because the price He paid has made us His inheritance, and from Him--in the end we'll see that we weren't saved from hell, or the world, or the devil, but saved from the wrath of an angry God.In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

Isa 12:1-6 KJV(1) And in that day thou shalt say, O LORD, I will praise thee: though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou comfortedst me.(2) Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.(3) Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation.(4) And in that day shall ye say, Praise the LORD, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted.(5) Sing unto the LORD; for he hath done excellent things: this is known in all the earth.(6) Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.What 'day' do we think he had in mind?How about this one?In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. (Joh 14:20 ASV)And in that day ye shall ask me no question. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if ye shall ask anything of the Father, he will give it you in my name. (Joh 16:23 ASV)In that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you; (Joh 16:26 ASV)

Thanks Ron,If we fail to grasp that...Awoke with a tremendous sense of what this is at the core and it is falsehood. This ought to rank equal with any other false doctrine. Perhaps a bit to simplistic and even an assumption to slap a stereotype on, but the leaning sounds eerily like universalism.In one sense the very essence of the cross, God's just wrath poured out on the perfect man, our Lord and savior...If we cannot pause and see and even attempt to let that sink into our very being. All of opinions our as worthless as filthy rags, that hasn't changed one iota.Eph 5:1 Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. Eph 5:2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. Eph 5:3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Eph 5:4 Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. Eph 5:5 For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Eph 5:6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Our human misplaced anger and the anger of the Lord are diametrically opposed. If we attempt to set ourselves up as ruler and judge then we as blood bought, and shall we not pause again at the cost?, regenerate, born again believers usurp the Lords rightful place on the throne... Are we to believe that the Lord only looks with disapproval? A mere grieving of sadness?Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.This is rank heresy. Just as bad as the prosperity 'gospel', works salvation, denial that Jesus came in the flesh or any other deadly error. At one point there was an equating of Martin Luther and the heretic label put upon him and that this whole monstrous discourse was on equal footing. Nonsense. This needs a tent peg driven through it before it spreads it's disease any further. Rev 6:9 And when He opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. Rev 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, do You not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" Rev 6:11 Then a long white robe was given to them, and it was said to them that they should rest yet a while, until also their fellow servants and their brothers, who were about to be killed as also they were, should complete their course. Rev 6:12 And I saw when He opened the sixth seal, that there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the whole moon became like blood. Rev 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, like a fig tree casting its untimely figs, being shaken by a mighty wind. Rev 6:14 Then the sky was split like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island were removed out of their places. Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the magnates and the high-ranking military men, and the rich and the mighty, and every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the crags of the mountains. Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and crags, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him that sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb! Rev 6:17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who shall be able to stand?" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~The Absoluteness of Immorality and Holiness (Revelation 21:7-8)Immorality and holiness are absolute, you cannot get behind them. When Our Lord talks about the radical evil of the human heart (e.g. Mark 7:21-22), it is a revelation we know nothing of; it comes to the shores of our lives in immorality and holiness. Immorality has its seat in every one of us, not in some of us. If a man is not holy, he is immoral, no matter how good he may seem. Immorality is at the basis of the whole thing; if it does not show itself outwardly, it will show itself before God. The New Testament teaches that no man or woman is safe apart from Jesus Christ because there is treachery on the inside. *“Out of the heart of men, proceed. . . .” The majority of us are grossly ignorant about the possibilities of evil in the heart. Never trust your common sense when the statements of Jesus contradict it, and when you preach see that you base your preaching on the revelation of Jesus Christ, not on the sweet innocence of human nature. When you hear a man cry out, like the publican of old, “God be merciful to me a sinner,” you have the problem of the whole universe. That man has reached the realization of himself at last, he knows that he is a guilty, immoral type of man and needs saving. Never take anyone to be good, and above all never take yourself to be good. Natural goodness will always break, always disappoint, why? Because the Bible tells us that “the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Never trust anything in yourself that God has not placed there through the regeneration of Our Lord Jesus Christ; and never trust anything saving that in anyone else.That is the stern platform you have to stand on when you present the truth of God, and it will resolve you on to a lonely platform, because your message will be craved for but its way of being presented will be resented. The Gospel of Jesus Christ awakens an intense craving and an equally intense resentment. Base on personal love for the Lord, not on personal love for men. Personal love for men will make you call immorality a weakness, and holiness a mere aspiration; personal love for the Lord will make you call immorality devilish, and holiness the only thing that can stand in the light of God. The only safety for the preacher is to face his soul not with his people, or even with his message, but to face his soul with his Saviour all the time.Chambers, O. Approved unto God.

There is a Spurgeon sermon here which might keep the balance;"The Lord is slow to anger and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked." - Nahum 1:3.

Our human misplaced anger and the anger of the Lord are diametrically opposed...Good point Mike. When we read verses like, "The wrath of God is revealed from heaven...", we as humans have a hard time understanding wrath as anything other than some emotional outburst. We have a hard time believing that anger and love can be expressed together. God cannot abide sin, he doesn't play with sin, he doesn't wink at sin. As a compass points to the north, God's settled reaction to sin is the outpouring and the unfolding of His wrath. This is the place where Paul chose to begin his description of the gospel in his letter to the Romans. After saying, and I'm paraphrasing here, "I am pleased to announce the good news of the gospel" (Rom 1:16), Paul immediately launches into "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men..."(v.18). If this is where Paul chose to begin shouldn't we begin there also?In Christ,Ron

If this is where Paul chose to begin shouldn't we begin there also?Yes. And as the passage goes on and Paul builds his point he preaches until all are made to know that we all are under sin. We have all held the truth in unrighteousness. Beginning as a small child we have turned aside from the counsel of our conscience into the path of rebellion. Therefore we deserve His wrath. Yet, Christ has been the receptient of that wrath. Every transgression and disobedience must receive a just recompense of reward, and Christ has been the propitiation for our sin. His is the price paid to reconcile our sin debt and therefore reconcile us to God. The cross is the place where we truly see the evidence of God's hatred of sin. What could be more evident? We stand in the shadow (as it were) of the wrath of God cast by Jesus Christ who has shielded us from His fierce anger. As the old hymn says:Rock of Ages cleft for meLet me hide myself in TheeLet the water and the bloodFrom Thy wounded side which flowedBe of sin the double curesave from wrath and make me pure Because we are in Him we shall be saved from wrath through Him.God Bless,-Robert

Hi Neilgin1,was that question directed to me?No actually I was asking Karl what he thought the cross was for if it's purpose was not to be a propitiation for the wrath of God.I think you need to read my post one more time. I do believe in the infinite mercies of God, but the topic of this thread is that God is no longer angry at sinners, in fact, according to Karl, He never was angry at sinners. A whole post about the Grace of God would have been out of place here. I do not believe that God is currently angry at me at all. The second time you quoted me you missed the context of that statement. The subject was that of my condition before God should I choose to stand on my own without Christ. I was attempting to show that if I try to satisfy the wrath of God by myself then His justice will require a eternity of payment from me from which I'll never escape his anger and wrath. If I a finite man choose to stand alone in this wrath to pay an infinite price I would be altogether destroyed in Hell and forced to pay forever in the furnace of the wrath of a justly angered God. But the depth of the mercies of God are shown to me that while I was yet a sinner, Christ died for me. Only an infinite being could pay an infinite price, and for the joy set before Him he endured the cross, scorning it's shame, and became the only sacrifice that could satisfy the wrath of God and not only cover, but remove my sin.This was the following context of my statement you quoted..My point was that the wrath of God is revealed against all men but it CAN be satisfied, but only in the cross. It's like a Divine cancellation. An infinite price was owed and only and infinite being could pay the price. Jesus sacrifice was so that it can actually remove our sin. When the Father sees us, it's as though we have never sinned when we trust in Jesus. Therefore His wrath is satisfied and His mercies and grace are rich toward us.In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

Hi RonIf this is where Paul chose to begin shouldn't we begin there also?mmm? as long as we remember that the people he was intending to preach to were 'beloved of God, called to be saints'.

Hi HulseyMy point was that the wrath of God is revealed against all men but it CAN be satisfied, but only in the cross. It's like a Divine cancellation. An infinite price was owed and only and infinite being could pay the price.I think we may be in the gap between redemption accomplished and redemption applied. Do we tell the sinner that he needs to be redeemed or that he has been? I tell him that there is a father waiting to receive him. I know that he must come to himself and rise and go and say to his father 'I have sinned', But I want to assure him that there is room in the father's house and that he needs to come home.My main fear in all this is that we shall attempt to do the Spirit's work for Him. My most conscious season of repentance was long after I had 'come home'. It was certainly the goodness of God that led me to repentance.There is a quotation from John Bunyan that I quoted in another thread;"Not the overheavy load of sin, but the discovery of mercy; not the roaring of devil, but the drawing of the Father, that makes a man come to Jesus Christ." John Bunyan, The Water of Life.Here's another one from Martin Luther;"You must preach as a mother suckles her child".I know this is not the whole story, but I do not find the blanket condemnation of the unsaved and the relentless message of an angry God in my New Testament.

Hi philo,I agree with you. The reason for my strong rhetoric on the wrath of God was only in response to the the misunderstanding in the original post. I was attempting to be as concise as possible without laboring the point. I agree totally with you that it's the kindness and the mercy of God that leads to repentance.In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

Bro. Ron makes a great point here. I know this is not the whole story, but I do not find the blanket condemnation of the unsaved and the relentless message of an angry God in my New Testament.I have noticed in my readings of Finney that it seems that the minds of the people were totally overcome with the dreadful thoughts of their sin before God; yet in other of his writings he declares this to be wholly unnecessary. If we would glory in folk writhing in anguish of mind over their sins we have a serious problem. This is why it is so important to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit when witnessing or ministering. Some folks are Gospel 'hardened' (as we say) and in those cases it seems that the message is stronger. I think that the message, when led by the Holy Ghost, will be suffucient to accomplish what God desires to do without overthrowing a persons free will. You can scare someone into doing something against their will and later when the fear is gone- so is the commitment many times.

Here is a quote from Martin Luther's preface to the book of Romans;The first duty of a preacher of the Gospel is, through his revealing of the law and of sin, to rebuke and to turn into sin everything in life that does not have the Spirit and faith in Christ as its base. Thereby he will lead people to a recognition of their miserable condition, and thus they will become humble and yearn for help. This is what St Paul does. He begins in chapter 1 by rebuking the gross sins and unbelief which are in plain view, as were (and still are) the sins of the pagans, who live without God's grace. He says that, through the Gospel, God is revealing his wrath from heaven upon all mankind because of the godless and unjust lives they live. For, although they know and recognize day by day that there is a God, yet human nature in itself, without grace, is so evil that it neither thanks nor honors God. This nature blinds itself and continually falls into wickedness, even going so far as to commit idolatry and other horrible sins and vices. It is unashamed of itself and leaves such things unpunished in others.In chapter 2, St. Paul extends his rebuke to those who appear outwardly pious or who sin secretly. Such were the Jews, and such are all hypocrites still, who live virtuous lives but without eagerness and love; in their heart they are enemies of God's law and like to judge other people. That's the way with hypocrites: they think that they are pure but are actually full of greed, hate, pride and all sorts of filth (cf. Matthew 23). These are they who despise God's goodness and, by their hardness of heart, heap wrath upon themselves. Thus Paul explains the law rightly when he lets no one remain without sin but proclaims the wrath of God to all who want to live virtuously by nature or by free will. He makes them out to be no better than public sinners; he says they are hard of heart and unrepentant...

The first duty of a preacher of the Gospel is, through his revealing of the law and of sin, to rebuke and to turn into sin everything in life that does not have the Spirit and faith in Christ as its base. Thereby he will lead people to a recognition of their miserable condition, and thus they will become humble and yearn for help. This is what St Paul does.RonI'm still not sure this is what Paul is doing. Romans is 'didache' not 'kerugma'. That is to say it is teaching not evangelism. To reveal the real nature of the matter is vital to the education and information of the saints, but do we find Paul saying this to the sinner in the accounts we haev in the Acts? That is my question.I am not denying the facts, only questioning its application.

I'm still not sure this is what Paul is doing. Romans is 'didache' not 'kerugma'. That is to say it is teaching not evangelism...Again, from Luther's preface to Romans;We find in this letter, then, the richest possible teaching about what a Christian should know: the meaning of law, Gospel, sin, punishment, grace, faith, justice, Christ, God, good works, love, hope and the cross. We learn how we are to act toward everyone, toward the virtuous and sinful, toward the strong and the weak, friend and foe, and toward ourselves. Paul bases everything firmly on Scripture and proves his points with examples from his own experience and from the Prophets, so that nothing more could be desired. Therefore it seems that St. Paul, in writing this letter, wanted to compose a summary of the whole of Christian and evangelical teaching which would also be an introduction to the whole Old Testament. Without doubt, whoever takes this letter to heart possesses the light and power of the Old Testament. Therefore each and every Christian should make this letter the habitual and constant object of his study. God grant us his grace to do so. Amen. but do we find Paul saying this to the sinner in the accounts we haev in the Acts?I appreciate your point here however, should we allow a lack of detail in the historical account of Acts to usurp what is, according to Luther, "a summary of the whole of Christian and evangelical teaching"? Surely evangelism should include the whole counsel of God.In Christ,Ron

RonTherefore it seems that St. Paul, in writing this letter, wanted to compose a summary of the whole of Christian and evangelical teaching which would also be an introduction to the whole Old Testament. I'm familiar with this point and often quote it. But I don't think we can regard Romans and the definitive exposition of the gospel on this basis. Why would we have the rest of the New Testament if this were true?I appreciate your point here however, should we allow a lack of detail in the historical account of Acts to usurp what is, according to Luther, "a summary of the whole of Christian and evangelical teaching"? Surely evangelism should include the whole counsel of God.I'm not sure that it can include the whole counsel of God. The whole question of election and the church, for example, seems to be missing from the Acts record of evangelism. Certainly, Romans is 'my gospel' in the words of Paul but to conclude that Romans is a model for evangelism is I think too great a jump for me.The record of the Acts is not exhaustive, I know, but surely in all the snippets we have of the work of evangelism we would see some reference to an angry God? Or coming from the opposite direction would you regard Romans 9-11 as an essential part of the proclamation of the gospel. As I have commented in another thread I think Romans is explanation not proclamation; for the saints, not the sinner.

The written word is not an end, God is still speaking to us, that word that He speaks to us is just as much apart of the Word of God is as the written word of God. Holy men of old were moved by the holy Ghost to write, how much more today with the holy Ghost in us, is there no holy men today that write under the inspiration of the holy Ghost?We hear great men like Dwight Moody, Smith Wigglesworth, David Wilkerson and Carter Conlon do we discount that anointing that is upon these men that speak as an oracle of God as nothing and counted as dung?Are we that far gone to believe that that written word is it? Without wanting to belabor a point...I need to say this, Karl.The idea behind these kind of statements scare me. The Word is an end, in that it points us to Christ. He is the fulfillment of the word. He came , not to destroy or undo or step outside the context of His own word, lest we could point the finger and call Him 'Liar', But in His own words, He came to fulfill them. The word is an end. Jesus is the end. His Spirit in us isn't going to give us extra-biblical (anything that isn't revealed in the word already) direction or leading. If anything, it is the opposite of what you are saying. He will allow our lives to 'fulfill' or manifest what has already been written.Be careful, my friend. I write this only out of concern for you and those that might read this and read no further.

As I have commented in another thread I think Romans is explanation not proclamation; for the saints, not the sinner.I would concur in that it is information essential to our understanding of the Gospel and in that understanding we can proclaim the Gospel accurately as we have a pretty firm grasp of it. I heard once that the difference between students today and say those in the time of Wycliff is that now it is sufficient to be able to recopy your notes on a test in order to pass the grade- where in Wycliff's day it was how well you could defend your subject in public. I believe Roman's was written in such a way as to cause us to understand God's working in salvation so that we can 'defend it in public' or really, can "give an answer for the hope that lies within us." It is certainly hard to find a 'formula' for how the Gospel is presented in preaching in the New Testament. understanding the Gospel will go along way in our conveying of that message. As I recall- Paul in many cases seemed to be presenting the Gospel almost in a 'debate' type mode. The people disputed with him and sometimes it ended in a riot. It was not a point by point and give an altar call at the end method. It was enguaging the people in their condition from the vantage point of fully understanding the Gospel. This is a highly versatile man. He understood the Gospel to the place to where he could present it and answer the arguments. Just more thoughts...

philologos wrote:Why would we have the rest of the New Testament if this were true?...I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God.. 1 Tim 3:14,15

But I don't think we can regard Romans and the definitive exposition of the gospel on this basis.I believe Luther used the words "summary" and "introduction" but not "definitive". I don't think that he has said Romans is definitive, only that it contains some of the richest teaching in the New Testament on a number of doctrines. As I have commented in another thread I think Romans is explanation not proclamation; for the saints, not the sinner.What end did Paul hope to achieve in explaining this teaching to saints? Also, what would preclude a saint from sharing this explanation to sinners when preaching the gospel? Or coming from the opposite direction would you regard Romans 9-11 as an essential part of the proclamation of the gospel.Again, I don't think Luther is saying the book is a definitive statement for evangelism, only that it contains teaching that is highly valuable toward that end.In Christ,Ron

Ron (philologos) writes:As I have commented in another thread I think Romans is explanation not proclamation; for the saints, not the sinner.Ron (inthelight) writes:What end did Paul hope to achieve in explaining this teaching to saints? Also, what would preclude a saint from sharing this explanation to sinners when preaching the gospel?

Hi Karl,Being that you're a preterist let me ask you a few questions.Are you a replacement theologian? Also, What do you do with the testimony of Polycarp (The Apostle John's disciple) who places the date of the writing of The Revelation of Jesus Christ at around A.D.96 26 years after the destruction of Jerusalem?Finally, do you believe in the literal physical return of Jesus Christ back to this earth?

Karl, brother,I know we all tend to do this to some extent, but could it be that this particular view is influencing how you see things in scripture?To quickly belabor the point, I am of the opinion of not having one in particular as it relates to pre-post-mid-whatever. Mostly, like many things in this walk that have found to be wanting, it's a process of elimination, best I can tell, with the right to always change our minds with more light as we ought. But this whole area to be dogmatic about it seems quite foolish and largely misses the point all together. Speaking in general here.The way it keeps appearing to me is that holding certain post scripts (no pun intended) you end up having to ignore whole other areas of scripture or contort them to fit into a preconceived ideal.But let me share with you one last thought regarding the the physical return of the LORD. I don't believe we shall ever see Jesus come again in physical form, because the LORD said, in John 16:10 "......because I go to my Father and you see me NO MORE"The LORD speaks about this in another verse and says, "The world seeth me NO MORE, but you see me......." He is signifying that although His followers and the world will never see Him physically again, yet the Christian will see Him, How? thru the Spirit that will be operating in them bringing forth the fruit of the Spirit which is the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.Just a few examples that would have to be explained...Act 1:11 They asked, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking up toward heaven? This same Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you saw him go up into heaven." Mar 13:19 For those days will be a time of suffering, a kind that has not happened from the beginning of the creation that God made until now and certainly will never happen again. Mar 13:20 If the Lord did not limit those days, no one would be saved. But for the sake of the elect whom he has chosen, he has limited those days. Mar 13:21 "At that time, if anyone says to you, 'Look! Here is the Christ!', or, 'Look! There he is!', don't believe it. Mar 13:22 For false christs and false prophets will appear and produce signs and omens to deceive, if possible, the elect. Mar 13:23 So be on your guard! I've told you everything before it happens." Mar 13:24 "But after the suffering of those days, 'The sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, Mar 13:25 the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of heaven will be shaken loose.' Mar 13:26 Then people will see 'the Son of Man coming in clouds' with great power and glory. Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. 1Jo 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 1Jo 3:3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Just in these verses alone the whole view point of the preterist falls apart. Have these things taken place yet? I know there is the 'partial preterist' point of view but that seems to be the same as mentioned earlier, trying to force scripture around a concept.Brother that is a rather disturbing use of John 16:10. May I scream it loudly?, CONTEXT!Keep reading on....Joh 16:16 In a little while you will no longer see me, then in a little while you will see me again." Joh 16:17 At this point, some of his disciples said to each another, "What does he meanby telling us, 'In a little while you will no longer see me, then in a little while you will see me again,' and 'because I am going to the Father'?" Joh 16:18 They kept saying, "What is this 'in a little while' that he keeps talking about? We don't know what he means." Joh 16:19 Jesus knew that they wanted to ask him a question, so he said to them, "Are you discussing among yourselves what I meant when I said, 'In a little while you will no longer see me, then in a little while you will see me again'? Joh 16:20 Truly, truly I tell you, you will cry and mourn, but the world will rejoice. You will be deeply distressed, but your pain will turn into joy. Joh 16:21 When a woman is in labor she has pain, for her hour has come. Yet when she has given birth to her child, she doesn't remember the agony anymore because of the joy of having brought a human being into the world. Joh 16:22 Now you are having pain. But I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you. You are mis applying this verse brother and trying to spiritualize it. For one, this is plainly talking of before and after His resurrection. Joh 2:22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said. "No more" doesn't mean "ever again".I know, everyone's ears are perked and anger is setting in and fingers are hot and ready to type a reply saying, "Heretic, Blasphemer".:-) Not necessarily brother. One of the biggest and most disturbing problems with a preterist view point is that as you stated and I would go further, it is exhausting. There is far too much that doesn't square with scripture, likewise it is so with the other 'camps'. The interruptions keep coming up; "But what about....."I am fully with Roberts earlier comments from here: Apostos--Rapture or falling away of the church? 2 Thes:My position on this may be a bit simple; but why not just be ready for whatever happens? If it be rapture so be it. If it be persecution, be ready for it. Too much stock in a pre trib position tends to keep folk unprepared. Some are said to be so pretrib that they will not eat Post Toasties (thats an American breakfast cereal). i talked to an elderly gentleman who said to me about a month ago that he had no concern about persecution because he was going up in the Rapture. I spent about 15 minutes recounting a few stories from John Foxe that he never heard of. That is my real concern; folk are not ready to suffer. Indeed! How much more we have toward that end with the Lord's use of parables, the exhortation to "Watch", to be prepared, to endure, endure what? One last thought here, one that has puzzled me before; If one is to hold to this point of view, that of the preterist, what is it that you are anticipating, expecting of the future course of history? And more so, does the course of the world that is present before our eyes square with it? Ultimately, is the world on a pace to right itself or is it going headlong into cannibalizing itself?Edit: That we all might become better Bereans, seems so much get's misconstrued by not exhausting all of scripture, letting it interpet itself. So many doctrines built upon proof texts instead of letting the texts prove us.

One last thought here, one that has puzzled me before; If one is to hold to this point of view, that of the preterist, what is it that you are anticipating, expecting of the future course of history? And more so, does the course of the world that is present before our eyes square with it? Ultimately, is the world on a pace to right itself or is it going headlong into cannibalizing itself?I am open to preterist interpretations, although I don't think anyone can be 'consistently' preterist, historicist, idealist or even futurist with the Revelation. To me an underlying question which I raised elsewhere is 'what is the purpose of the prophetic scriptures?' Were they to prepare us, to enable us to create a timetable, or what? Strangely enough I actually share some of Jake's concerns about the dangers of people in power adopting a particular view and thereby activating 'self fulfilling prophecies'. (Not often that I can say I agree with Jake!)I can't speak for anyone else but my answer to Mike's question 'what is it that you are anticipating, expecting of the future course of history?' would be, I'm not altogether sure, but I know I shall recognise it when I need to. John 13:19. If I did think I could predict history through God given prophecy should I try to resist it, or facilitate it? I am often called a 'replacement theologian' too. (among other things. :-?) Although this is not the way I would express my point of view. I would prefer the term 'fulfillment theology'. This usually stimulates some active debate, so I'll just go and get my hard hat. (one of Robert W's little jokes!) Actually, I'm just off to the evening meeting!

Hi KarlI have no idea who you are opposing here, but your post is full of presumptions which I certainly cannot share.For starters, you don't seem to see the difference between anger and temper. I don't think anyone here represented God has having a temper tantrum and throwing his toys/creation out of the cot.Secondly, your assumption sounds like an extreme form of Calvinism. The hardening is an important issue. I presume you have this verse in mind;And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go. (Exo 4:21 KJV) The word translated 'harden' here is a word which really means to strengthen. Here are a couple of examples...And one told Jacob, and said, Behold, thy son Joseph cometh unto thee: and Israel strengthened himself, and sat upon the bed. (Gen 48:2 KJV)But charge Joshua, and encourage him, and strengthen him: for he shall go over before this people, and he shall cause them to inherit the land which thou shalt see. (Deu 3:28 KJV)And Samson called unto the LORD, and said, O Lord GOD, remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes. (Jdg 16:28 KJV)You will see that to strengthen does not imply to direct or determine. You might as well blame the father in the prodigal son story for 'enabling' the son to go into the far country with his inheritance.Pharoah was not hardened against what he wanted to do, but was strengthened in his resolve to defy God. No doubt weakness or fear might have taken away 'the courage of his convictions'. All that God did was to add stamina to Pharoah's intention and make it possible for Pharoah to do what he really wanted to do which was to resist to the end. As a consequence of Pharoah doing what he wanted to do, God gained glory, but don't blame God for Pharoah's decisions.

HealingWaters, for your sake I would advice you to not mock God in this way, for you yourself are getting upset about what the Lord Himself has declared! He is a God of jealousy and what happens when we sin is we arouse His holy jealousy and causes intense anger to kindle. Scripture tells us this!Psalm 18 describes this terribly, and then goes on to describe God's love for us and how he delivers rescues us from sin! This is John 3:16, if you'd like... however, John 3:16 says, "shall not perish", and so it will be for all those who reject his Son.He hasn't changed, but His wrath has been unleashed upon Christ and those under self-condemnation. All those verses in the Old Testament about God unleashing his fury have come to pass to a degree, and Jesus has borne the punishment for those who believe.Are we to not fear God now that Jesus has delivered us? Certainly not! He is a terrific God, full of zeal, and we must hold true to the cross lest we fall and are consumed!Satan will make you forget that God is a jealous God (his most important attribute)! How much more will his wrath devour us if we stir Him to jealousy even AFTER He sent Jesus, in this new covenant?The new testament does not tame God (as if He were a monster), and I could list you hundreds of verses.May your holy name be praised, Yahweh.PS- From God's jealousy comes Love, the greatest thing in the world!

Hi Karl,I would try to avoid generalizations between God and man. To equate God's anger with man's anger will lead you to error. For example you said Earthly Dads are better then God, at least we can have fun with our Dad's, but we can't have any fun with a grumpy, ired, wrathful, angry and disapproving heavenly Father. I'm not sure what you mean by "we can't have any fun." It's true that God never winks at sin and He will always judge it with his goal being repentance.Here's just one verse but there are many on His jealousy. Deu 6:15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.I've never found God to be grumpy and He is always right, always fair, and always has pure motives. I hope you're not angry and believe that Ron and Eli's post were excellent and pray that they will help you.

I was looking into this verse and was surprised to see Youngs Literal Translation, which reads God is a righteous judge, And He is not angry at all times. (Psa 7:11 YLT)The underlining is mine.I then decided I would see what Clarke said about it;Psa 7:11 - God is angry with the wicked every day - The Hebrew for this sentence is the following: ועל זעם בכל יום veel zoem becol yom; which, according to the points, is, And God is angry every day. Our translation seems to have been borrowed from the Chaldee, where the whole verse is as follows: אלהא דינא זכאה ובתקוף רגיז אל רשיעי כל יומא elaha daiyana zaccaah ubithkoph rageiz al reshiey col yoma: “God is a righteous Judge; and in strength he is angry against the wicked every day.”The Vulgate: Deus Judex justus, fortis, et patiens; numquid irascitur per sinpulos dies? “God is a Judge righteous, strong, and patient; will he be angry every day?”The Septuagint: Ὁ Θεος Κριτης δικαιος, και ισχυρος, και μακροθυμος, μη οργην επαγων καθ’ ἑκαστην ἡμεραν; “God is a righteous Judge, strong and longsuffering; not bringing forth his anger every day.”Syriac: “God is the Judge of righteousness; he is not angry every day.”The Arabic is the same as the Septuagint.The Aethiopic: “God is a just Judge, and strong and longsuffering; he will not bring forth tribulation daily.”Coverdale: God is a righteous judge, and Gob is ever threateninge.King Edward’s Bible by Becke 1549, follows this reading.Cardmarden: God is a righteous judge, [strong and patient] and God is provoked every day. Cardmarden has borrowed strong and patient from the Vulgate or Septuagint, but as he found nothing in the Hebrew to express them, he put the words in a smaller letter, and included them in brackets. This is followed by the prose version in our Prayer Book.The Genevan version, printed by Barker, the king’s printer, 1615, translates thus: “God judgeth the righteous, and him that contemneth God every day.” On which there is this marginal note: “He doth continually call the wicked to repentance, by some signs of his judgments.” My ancient Scotico - English MS. Psalter only begins with the conclusion of this Psalm.I have judged it of consequence to trace this verse through all the ancient versions in order to be able to ascertain what is the true reading, where the evidence on one side amounts to a positive affirmation, “God is angry every day;” and, on the other side, to as positive a negation, “He is Not angry every day.” The mass of evidence supports the latter reading. The Chaldee first corrupted the text by making the addition, with the wicked, which our translators have followed, though they have put the words into italics, as not being in the Hebrew text. In the MSS. collated by Kennicott and De Rossi there is no various reading on this text.The true sense may be restored thus: - אל el, with the vowel point tsere, signifies God: אל al, the same letters, with the point pathach, signifies not. Several of the versions have read it in this way: “God judgeth the righteous, and is Not angry every day.” He is not always chiding, nor is he daily punishing, notwithstanding the continual wickedness of men: hence, the ideas of patience and longsufferiny which several of the versions introduce. Were I to take any of the translations in preference to the above, I should feel most inclined to adopt that of Coverdale.Clarke should never be disregarded although occasionally he takes an unexpected turn. His preference for Coverdale here is because of the sense that God does not leave the wicked unaware of His righteous judgment, and is constantly threatening 'every day'.The Geveva Bible, that most Protestant of all translations, has in its margin a note Psa 7:11 - God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry [with the wicked] (i) every day. (i) He continually calls the wicked to repentance by some sign of his judgments. pointing out, by means of the square brackets, that the words [with the wicked] are not in the original Hebrew (the KJV does the same with italics), which undermines this thread somewhat?.:-?

philologos wrote:which undermines this thread somewhat?. And I would add humbly, maybe our true heart attitude toward the unrepentant sinner. :-( Well done Ron, thats some awesome mining.

Hi Ron,This is quite something here. But if I am taking it all into account correctly it doesn't seem to have changed anything at all.God judgeth the righteousSeems to imply that it has been meted out and in more than just a once for all kind of sense as was positioned very early on here.Thinking along the lines of "Those He loves He chastises".But it is all rather besides the point as it relates to much of where this discussion has taken us. If I may put it, the "type" of 'anger' we are discussing in the first place.So I don't see it undermining anything and do note the "?" at the end there...

Hi Karl,Been meaning to get back to this.These last couple of replies are a bit confusing, hard to tell which prior responses you are responding to. If you could snatch a quote or refer to a name it would be helpful.But where you brought out the effects of your upbringing, the issues with your father, it was helpful in seeing where you were coming from.It is sad to hear such things brother, my heart certainly goes out to you.If I may, wanted to bring out some things:Earthy fathers are a representation of our heavenly Father. The only thing I might add there is ought to be. It does seem to foster the wrong proscription when one has an absent or harsh father and uses that as the fodder for as you stated "They see God as someone with a club ready to strike them down when they sin or fail Him."But in all fairness the question/statement you first put here was that God was "no longer" angry and that is where many of us came at it from the angle of what scripture states. In effect we missed each other by how that was put to us.It's still a good discussion in fleshing out just what all entails God's sovereignty, His just wrath and just how far apart our often times misguided anger, stemming out of impure motives and pure (indignation) are. It just goes to show how tremendously other God's holiness is and our own feeble attempts to grasp it.My apologies for the earlier spouting off of 'heresy', think I misunderstood you as you have since clarified a bit. Think the equating with Luther and whatnot was still a bit of a reach, just don't think it warranted that label.