Debating Atheism (part 5)

This is a continuation from the comments in the previous post.

We must first understand that God’s anger is nothing like man’s anger. It is a common misunderstanding that when God is portrayed as angry or “intolerant” that he has somehow taken on a character flaw. If anger is seen as a flaw in humans, then God must either not experience anger or, if He does, He is not perfect. Due to this misunderstanding, many Christians will steer away from bringing up this idea of God’s wrath. As I pointed out with Romans, and any Bible concordance will show, this theme is a very central and consistent message throughout Scripture.

The passage of Romans 1:21-32 is a description of evil that is very present in society today. John Murray defines wrath as, “the holy revulsion of God’s being against that which is the contradiction of his holiness.” What I believe Paul is saying in Romans is that God’s wrath is revealed in the manifestation of evil present today. A very good and basic interpretation of the passage is provided by James Boice in his commentary on Romans. He says,

“Paul speaks of a downward inclination of the race by which the world, having rejected God and therefore being judicially abandoned by God, is given up to evil. It is set on a course that leads to perversions and ends in a debasement in which people call good evil and evil good. Human depravity and the misery involved are the revelation of God’s anger.”

In other words, when God allows mankind to do as they wish, wickedness results. This is apparent when reading the newspapers, watching television, or reading the blogosphere. Wickedness is apparent everywhere, whether the Christian or secular community. The problem is not whether or not someone is wicked but how they will defend their wickedness before a perfect and holy God.