Featured The Wrath of God

Truthfully, I am unqualified to answer. Theological terms (like PSA) carry vast quantities of nuanced baggage that I am ignorant of. I came to Christ when God laid claim to me and what I know I learned by reading scripture to find Truth. I still search for TRUTH. I ask and listen and weigh everything against what I read in scripture and know from empirical experience. Those are the tools given to me.

“Wrath” carries an emotional motivation that may or may not be appropriate to apply to God when discussing “atonement”. (Or maybe it is appropriate). I went looking for the Scripture examples of God’s wrath. I told you in the OP what I found. I invited others to share what else they knew of to expand the “database” from which to understand Christ as our propitiation and any role that God’s WRATH may have played. There is no example of God’s Wrath directed against an innocent in the verses that I found. There are examples of God’s wrath being turned aside for His beloved.

There is no denial that Christ suffered for our sin, but was that WRATH or something else?

 

NASB95.

I agree that disobedience by “children of God” makes Him angrier than disobedience by “pagans”. “From those to whom much has been given, much is expected” I guess.

What I can’t help but wonder is: Is “anger” different than “wrath”?
My “gut” tells me they are different. I worry based on the examples given in the verses in the OP, that “wrath” against an innocent might violate “Be angry and sin not”. God is RIGHT to be angry with US. God is RIGHT to pour out His wrath against His enemies. God certainly has THE RIGHT (He is MERCIFUL and LOVING) to take the punishment for OUR sin. However, is God “RIGHT” to pour His “wrath” on an innocent?

The blood of the animals turned aside God’s punishment for the sin of His people, but did God HATE that animal? Did God pour out His wrath and desire that animal to suffer in place of those sinning people? I don’t get that impression.

I think back to naked Adam and Eve, then God covered them with animal skins. The death of those animals was not about God being angry (with the animals or with the people) … it was a necessary act to cover their nakedness (sin). So what if the blood of animals that flowed from the Temple was also not about WRATH, but was about “covering nakedness”? What if the death of Christ was not about WRATH, but was about “covering nakedness”?

Then this PROPITIATION isn’t about “appeasing anger” but it is about “transforming enemies back into friends”. My problem is that splitting this hair definitively, requires more skill in dead languages than I possess. So I trust in many skilled translators, I ask questions, and I listen to many counselors. Then I trust the Spirit that lives in me to lead me to the truth (or not - sometimes God decides that I just don’t need to know that). [yet?]

 

I agree (and said as much). The question is ... Was it WRATH?
Was the WRATH of God poured out on those animals?
Did they die merely to cover their "nakedness"? (Genesis 3:7, Genesis 3:21)

 

... but was God angry at the ark, or was the reason for its buffeting something else?
It was NECESSARY for the ark to suffer the storm to protect those inside it. The "torment" was motivated by love and necessity rather than anger (wrath).

 

Isaiah 53:4-6 [NASB20]

4 However, [it was] our sicknesses [that] He Himself bore, And our pains [that] He carried; Yet we ourselves assumed that He had been afflicted, Struck down by God, and humiliated. 5 But He was pierced for our offenses, He was crushed for our wrongdoings; The punishment for our well-being [was laid] upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed. 6 All of us, like sheep, have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the wrongdoing of us all To fall on Him.​

No question from this that Christ SUFFERED (pierced, crushed) BECAUSE OF US (our sins - offenses, wrongdoings) ... PUNISHMENT was laid on HIM, and we were healed by that punishment. That makes the suffering of Christ "necessisary" for redemption, but it does not make it "anger" as the only possibility. It also does not preclude the possibility of WRATH (punishment given in anger).

Isaiah 53:10-12 [NASB20]

10 But the LORD desired To crush Him, causing [Him] grief; If He renders Himself [as] a guilt offering, He will see [His] offspring, He will prolong [His] days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand. 11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see [it and] be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, For He will bear their wrongdoings. 12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the plunder with the strong, Because He poured out His life unto death, And was counted with wrongdoers; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the wrongdoers.​

This comes closest of anything I have seen to supporting WRATH.
Why did the LORD desire to crush Him? Anger/Wrath at our 'offenses/wrongdoings' is a legitimate reading within the context of the chapter. The ultimate result that follows (justify many) is also a possible reason. So which is the TRUE reason?