The Wrath of God

There are at least two viable reasons why I believe that wrath cannot be considered an attribute of God. First and foremost, Scripture nowhere states that wrath is an attribute which makes up the nature, essence, or character of God. More than merely an argument from silence, this assertion rests on Scripture, which does indicate what characteristics comprise God’s nature (i.e., love, holiness, justice, omniscience, etc.). Second, wrath as an attribute cannot be expressed intrapersonally among the members of the Godhead (Trinity).

That Scripture indicates God expresses or demonstrates wrath is undeniable (cf. Matt. 3:7; John 3:36; Rom. 1:18; 2:5, 8; 5:9; 9:22; 12:19; Eph. 5:6; Col. 3:6; Heb. 3:11; 4:3; Rev. 6:16, 17; 14:10, 19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19; 19:15 et al.). The prophet Nahum writes, "A jealous and avenging God is the LORD; the LORD is avenging and wrathful. The LORD takes vengeance on His adversaries, and He reserves wrath for His enemies. The LORD is slow to anger and great in power, and the LORD will by no means leave the guilty unpunished" (Nahum 1:2-3 NASB).

This and other like verses (cf. Deut. 9:7; 2 Kings 22:13; Ezra 5:12; Ps. 5:5; 7:11; 11:5-6; Isa. 59:18; Rev. 14:10, 19; 15:7; 19:15) have left some with the impression that wrath is part of God’s nature -- part of the very essence which makes God, God. Calvinist Wayne Grudem, for example, writes:

It may surprise us to find how frequently the Bible talks about the wrath of God. Yet if God loves all that is right and good and all that conforms to his moral character, it should not be surprising that he would hate everything that is opposed to his moral character. God’s wrath directed against sin is therefore closely related to God’s holiness and justice. God’s wrath may be defined as follows: God’s wrath means that he intensely hates all sin.¹

Dr. Grudem is right, I think, in stating that God’s moral character hates that to which it is opposed. But instead of suggesting that God’s wrath is "related to" His holiness and justice -- as though it is merely the negative component of the two attributes -- would it not be more proper to insist that God’s wrath is the result of His holiness and justice being offended? I think so.

For example, when the Bible reveals certain attributes of God, each are stated in such a way that relates to who God is -- His character. Take the attribute of love for example. The apostle John writes that God is love (1 John 4:8). This speaks of God’s character and nature. God does not merely possess love. He does not merely express love. Love is part of His character or essence.

Wrath, however, is not mentioned as part of God’s essence, nature, or character in Scripture. If God had never created anything or anyone, He would still be love, because that is who He is; and love could be, can be, and is expressed within the three Persons of the Trinity. Wrath, on the contrary, cannot be expressed within the Trinity. If wrath is one of the many components which make God, God, then how can wrath be demonstrated within the three persons of the Godhead from all eternity past? It could not, and therefore cannot, be an attribute of God.

God indeed expresses, and is willing to demonstrate, wrath. His "loving" attribute does not prevent Him from expressing anger or punishing sin. But Scripture does not teach that wrath is a component which makes up the nature and essence of God. Again, Grudem writes:

This also is an attribute for which we should thank and praise God. It may not immediately appear to us how this can be done, since wrath seems to be such a negative concept. Yet it is helpful for us to ask what God would be like if he were a God who did not hate sin. . . . God’s wrath should motivate us to evangelism and should also cause us to be thankful that God finally will punish all wrongdoing and will reign over a new heavens and a new earth in which there will be no unrighteousness.²

The problem Grudem and other Calvinists present, in my opinion, is twofold: 1) the fact that God hates and will punish sin does not necessitate wrath as being an attribute of God. He could react in wrath and anger at sin without it being an attribute; and 2) the mere fact that God, in Calvinism, has meticulously foreordained everything which happens among His creatures merely by decree, and also will "punish all wrongdoing" -- wrongdoing which He meticulously foreordained by decree -- is quite troubling. That’s like constructing a compass and then blaming it when it points north -- the very action for which you constructed the compass! Is this the holy and just nature or character of God that we see demonstrated in Scripture -- that we see demonstrated in Jesus Christ, "the exact representation of His nature" (Heb. 1:3 NASB)? I do not think so.

However, what behooves us all to remember is that, though God is willing to demonstrate wrath (Rom. 9:22), it is not necessarily His delight to do so. God "takes no pleasure" in the destruction of human beings (Ezek. 18:32; 33:11). What pleases God is redemption (1 Tim. 2:3-4), not condemnation: He sent His Son into the world to save human beings (John 3:16), not to condemn them (John 3:17).

John Piper is not convinced by this argument. He writes: "This verse [Psalm 115:3; cf. 135:6] teaches that whenever God acts, he acts in a way that pleases him. God is never constrained to do a thing that he despises. He is never backed into a corner where his only recourse is to do something he hates to do. He does whatever he pleases. And therefore, in some sense, he has pleasure in all that he does" (link).

For Piper, everything God does or enacts brings Him pleasure. Therefore, having unconditionally predetermined to consign untold billions to an eternal torment in hell actually brought (and will bring) God pleasure, contrary to Scripture (Ezekiel 18:23; 33:11). Dr. Thomas Oden, on the other hand, has implicated the happiness (blessedness) of God correctly when he writes:

To say that God is eternally blessed means that God rejoices eternally in the outpouring of goodness, mercy, and love upon creatures, each in accordance with their ability to participate in God’s being. The blessedness of God, or divine beatitude, means that God’s life is full of joy, both within the Godhead and in relation to creatures. God’s enjoyment of redeemed creation is compared to the joy of a bridegroom who rejoices over the bride (Isa. 62:5). . . .

One is blessed who "has whatever he wills and who wills nothing evil" (Tho. Aq., SCG I.100, p. 300, referring to Augustine, Trin. XIII. 5, NPNF 1 III, p. 171). God has what he wills and wills nothing evil, and is therefore incomparably blessed. . . . It is also said that God is angry and grieved over idolatry and sin. . . . Terms such as "God’s anger" are based on analogies that point to God’s rejection of sin. These analogies are best used with constraint. Since the foreknowledge of God always already envisions the triumph of grace over sin . . . God rejoices also at the overcoming of sin, even while sin is amid history gradually being judged and overruled. . . .³

Jesus said, "I tell you that . . . there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent" (Luke 15:7). Jesus was reacting to the attitude of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, who said of Jesus, "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them" (Luke 15:2). The Pharisees and teachers of the Law thought that they were righteous. They were the "righteous persons who do not need to repent," meaning that they did not think they needed to repent due to their righteous works of the Law.

Nevertheless, what we find at Luke 15 is that what makes God rejoice; i.e., what brings Him pleasure is the repentance, not the reprobation, of a sinner. If wrath were an attribute of God, a component of His nature, then even reprobation would bring Him direct pleasure. But Scripture teaches that the death of the wicked does not bring Him pleasure. For some theologians to insist that the death of the wicked actually does bring God pleasure speaks volumes about their own view of the Triune God.

__________

¹ Wayne A. Grudem, Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith, ed. Jeff Purswell (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), 94.

² Ibid., 95.

³ Thomas C. Oden, The Living God, Systematic Theology, Volume One (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1987), 128-9.

The Love of God

The apostle John confesses, "We love, because He first loved us" (1 John 4:19 NASB). The object "Him" (i.e., "we love Him because") is absent from other translations other than the King James and New King James Versions. The NET Bible footnote explains that the "obvious objects that could be supplied from the context are either God himself or other believers (the brethren). It may well be that the author has both in mind at this point" (link).

John instructs believers, "Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God" (1 John 4:7 NASB). The NET Bible footnote continues, "the statement is general enough to cover both alternatives, although the following verse puts more emphasis on love for the brethren" (link). Our Triune God truly does love us. The apostle Paul confesses that God "demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8). Whenever you are in doubt regarding God’s love for you, look to the Cross, where He demonstrated that love.

What is true is that I love my brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus because God first loved me (cf. 1 John 4:19). However, I also love the Lord because He first loved me. He loved me while I was stuck helplessly in sin. Even when I was God’s enemy, He reconciled me (and sinful humanity) to Himself through Christ Jesus (Rom. 5:10; 2 Cor. 5:19). God did not just tell me that He loved me; He demonstrated His love for me by sacrificing His one and only Son Jesus Christ in order that, by grace through faith in Him, I might be saved from the wrath of God to come (John 3:16, 26; 15:13; Rom. 5:6-8; Eph. 2:8; 1 John 3:16).

I also love the Lord because His love for me is unconditional. His love for me is not object-oriented. He does not love me because of anything I do in particular. If He did, then were I to cease doing that for which He loved me, He could cease loving me.

But His love for me is not conditioned upon anything that I may (or may not) do. In spite of my being fickle, hypocritical, sinful, spiteful, arrogant, ignorant, helpless, intentional, neglectful, apathetic, careless, inconsistent, unloving, unlovable, prayerless, thoughtless, stubborn, wrong -- among so many other unmentioned characteristics -- He loves me still. God hates my sin, but He loves me still in and through Christ.

What must also be admitted is that I love the Lord because of His grace at work in my heart through the indwelling Holy Spirit: God’s love [or my love for God] has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us (Rom. 5:5). The apostle means either that God’s love (i.e., His love, which includes love for us, which spills over into our love for others) has been poured into our hearts, or that a love for God has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit. Many people may claim to be Christian but have difficulty confessing that they love Jesus Christ. We call these people "nominal" Christians (meaning, Christians in name only). Do you love Jesus?

Jesus said: "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments" (John 14:15). Our obedience to Him demonstrates our love for Him. He said, "He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him" (John 14:21). Jesus then emphatically stated that the one who loves Him will keep His word, and His Father will love him, and both of Them will come to him and make Their abode with him (John 14:23, emphasis added).

Thus we understand that those who do not keep His commandments demonstrate that they do not love Him: "He who does not love Me," admitted Jesus, "does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me" (John 14:24). The apostle also made a similar confession:

For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile to God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God (Rom. 8:5-8 NASB).

We must be reminded and remind others to not let our thoughts be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ (2 Cor. 11:3). We must pay greater attention to what we have heard so that we do not drift away from it (Heb. 2:1). We must abide in the love of and our love for Jesus Christ: "Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love" (John 15:9-10).

But I can place my confidence in Jesus, in that, as I am "working out" my salvation "with fear and trembling," He is at work in me, enabling me "both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Phil. 2:12-13). He is entirely trustworthy and I love Him for it. I love Him also for every single blessing that is in Him (Eph. 1:3). I love Him for the rod of discipline (Ps. 23:4; Heb. 12:8) as much as for the staff of comfort (Ps. 23:4). The Song of the Lamb, from the daily Collect of the Book of Common Prayer, partly quoted from the Revelation of Jesus Christ (Rev. 15:3-4), concludes:

O ruler of the universe, Lord God,
great deeds are they that you have done,
surpassing human understanding.

Your ways are ways of righteousness and truth,
O King of all the ages.

Who can fail to do you homage, Lord,
and sing the praises of your Name?
for you only are the Holy One.

All nations will draw near and fall down before you,
because your just and holy works have been revealed.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit:
as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be,
world without end. Amen.

Saturday Devotion: The Public Invitation and Calvinism

There are Calvinists who disdain the evangelistic use of the "altar call," or "public invitation," to come to Christ Jesus. For example, Steve Hays, of Triablogue infamy, insists that the "altar call system is unscriptural." I have to wonder what "scriptures" Hays is reading, because the Christian New Testament grants an ample amount of examples of public invitations for sinners to repent and follow Christ Jesus.

One must wonder also why any Calvinist would disdain the altar call since 1) God meticulously foreordains all things, according to Calvinists, and that would, by necessity, include the altar call; 2) God can bring His elect to Christ through the altar call; 3) the altar call is merely a public invitation to trust in Christ; 4) Jesus Himself called people publicly unto Himself; 5) Christ's disciples also called people publicly unto repentance and faith in Jesus; and 6) ministers can just as easily manipulate people through their sermons -- they certainly do not need an altar to accomplish that!

Today's devotion is taken from R. Alan Streett's chapter "The Public Invitation and Calvinism," in the book Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism, edited by David L. Allen and Steve W. Lemke, published by B&H Academic, 2010. Streett is W. A. Criswell Chair of Expository Preaching at Criswell College in Dallas, Texas, and he writes the following.

__________

Most Calvinists oppose the use of a public invitation or altar call at the end of sermons.¹ They think such practices tend to be confusing at best, spiritually dangerous at worst, and certainly a hindrance to true evangelism. Strict five-point Calvinists criticize the invitation on three grounds. First, they believe it has no biblical support. Second, they believe its origin can be traced back only a few hundred years. Third, they think it is incompatible with their understanding of total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, and irresistible grace. . . .

Calvinist critics contend that the invitation is a modern contrivance, dating back only to nineteenth-century evangelist Charles Finney. In reality, examples abound in the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. . . .

Jesus called people to follow Him publicly. He promised, "Whosoever confesses Me before men, him will I also confess before My Father in heaven" (Matt. 10:32). Conversely, He warned, "But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven" ([Matt. 10:33]). Jesus offered little hope of salvation to those who wished to remain anonymous.

One of His favorite words of exhortation was "Come." To some He said, "Come, follow Me" (Matt. 19:21). To others He called out, "Come and see" (John 1:39). To the masses He cried, "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matt. 11:28). On another occasion He commanded, "Come, take up the cross and follow Me" (Mark 10:21). All sinners were exhorted to "come like little children" (Matt. 19:14). In the Revelation both the Spirit and the bride say, "Come," and partake of "the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17). Both God and the evangelist issued this dual call.

Many responded to Jesus' call. To Zaccheus, perched high in a tree, He said, "Make haste and come down" (Luke 19:5). In full view of friends and foe alike who knew him as a despicable but wealthy tax collector, he answered the appeal (vv. 8-9). Had he remained in a tree, Zaccheus would have missed his opportunity to be saved.

When Jesus said, "Who touched Me?" a woman with an issue of blood responded openly. The record shows that "fearing and trembling . . . [she] came and fell down before Him. . . . And He said to her, 'Daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace'" (Mark 5:33-34). Had she remained hidden among the crowd, she might have been healed but not saved. Similarly, the leper returned after his healing, "fell down on his face," and thanked Jesus publicly (Luke 17:16). After inquiring into the whereabouts of the other nine lepers, Jesus pronounced, "Your faith has made you well" (v. 19). Again, an outward action was tied to salvation.

The apostle Paul reminds us "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made to salvation" (Rom. 10:9-10). However one cuts it, this text links public confession to salvation. One must both believe and confess the facts of the gospel in order to be saved (v. 9). Just as the heart believes "to righteousness," so the mouth confesses "to salvation" (v. 10). . . .

While a public profession of faith is not a guarantee of salvation, it always accompanies salvation (Rom. 10:9-10). That is why we give an invitation.

We do not practice calling people to follow Christ publicly for pragmatic reasons but because we honestly desire to follow the pattern found in the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Therefore, let us not shy away from giving an invitation because of its critics or its many abuses. Let us strive instead to emulate Christ and the apostles by inviting people to follow in the Master's footsteps. . . .²

__________

¹ Streett writes the following footnote: "E. Hulse, The Great Invitation (Hertfordshire, England: Evangelical Press, 1986) stands as an example of the strict Calvinist who opposes the public invitation. He disparagingly labels the public invitation an 'evangelical sacrament' (103) and devotes the entirety of chapter seven to his claim (104-9). L. S. Chafer, True Evangelism (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2002) is an example of a four-point Calvinist who holds the same position." See R. Alan Streett, "The Public Invitation and Calvinism," in Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism, eds. David L. Allen and Steve W. Lemke (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010), 233.

² Ibid., 233-51.