Tuesday, 10 February 2009

Penal substitution portrays an angry God

On the cross Jesus triumphed over evil powers (Col. 2:15), the cross provides an inspiring example to those who suffer unjustly (1 Peter 2:21-23), and the cross is the place where Christ became a curse for us (Gal. 3:13). I believe that the third of these statements teaches the doctrine of penal substitution.

Penal substitution teaches that on the cross Jesus died as a substitute for sinful human beings, experiencing the righteous judgement of God for the evil that we have done. In the next few blogs I hope to defend this doctrine as it is currently being questioned by many in the Christian scene.

This blog will follow a fairly random path as thoughts appeal to me. I begin with an objection that someone might put against it.


Objection 1 'Penal substitution portrays an angry God'


We need to be clear about God’s love and his anger. Love is a part of God’s essence, anger is not. The Bible declares that ‘God is love’ (1 John 4:16 ), it does not say ‘God is anger’. Before God made this world he was love. Were there no world to love he would still be love. Yet if there had been no rebellion God would not be angry. His anger is a response, consistent with his holiness, to evil and sin.

The second thing that we need to be clear about is that God’s anger and our anger differ. Human anger is often an unstable outburst that is motivated by wounded pride and is filled with spite. Many people have a hard time coming to grips with the thought of an angry God because they have had such horrible experiences of human anger. Yet God’s anger is devoid of sin. He is not easily angered (Exodus 34:6), he is not petty. He is hostile towards evil because he is holy.

Thirdly, God’s love and anger are not in opposition. The world is portrayed as the subject of God’s wrath (Ephesians 2:3) but also the object of his love (John 3:16). Similarly on the cross Jesus experienced the righteous anger of the Father but the Father never stopped loving him!

No comments: