btor2
BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF PAUL’S LETTER TO THE ROMANS
Man needs the righteousness of God to deliver him from the wrath of God.
“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.” (Rom. 1:18.)
Note at the beginning of this verse the explanatory gar [for] connects this verse to the first part of verse 17 which is about the revelation of the righteousness of God. The righteousness of God (God’s deliverance) is being revealed (actualized) in the preaching of the gospel because the wrath of God is being revealed (actualized) from heaven. Thus the revelation of the wrath of God is the need and reason for the revelation of the righteousness of God. Paul also asserts here in verse 18 that this wrath of God “is being continually revealed“. Revelation in this verse as in verse 17 is not just a disclosure of truth to be understood by the mind but it is the working of God that makes effective and actual the truth. Thus, the wrath of God is revealed in its actualization and this actualization is the revelation of the wrath of God. Paul’s use of the present tense of the Greek verb translated “being revealed” indicates that this revelation of the wrath of God is not just future as the Jews thought but is going on now in the present. The present nature of this revelation of the wrath of God is set forth and explained in verses 24 thru 32.
God’s attitude toward sin is expressed in the Scriptures by the concept of the wrath of God. In both the Old and New Testaments, God’s opposition to sin is expressed in terms also used in the description of human emotions of anger, indignation, and wrath. But the wrath of God should not be thought of as an unstable, capricious emotion. It is true that men’s anger is so often such an impulsive passion, usually involving a large element of fickleness together with a lack of self-control. But the wrath of God is not to be so conceived. Neither is it to be thought of as like the anger of the heathen anthropomorphic deities. The writers of the Bible have nothing to do with the pagan concepts of a “capricious and vindictive diety, inflicting arbitrary punishments on offending worshippers, who must then bribe him back to a good mood by the appropriate offerings.” [16]
The Biblical concept of the wrath of God should be thought of as the stern and settled personal reaction of God’s love against sin in man. God’s wrath must be understood in terms of God’s love. Love is that decision of a person loving to act for the good of the person loved. It is not just an emotion, an easy-going, good-natured sentimentalism or good feeling of attraction or fondness for someone. But rather it is a decision of the will. But since the will involves the emotions as well as the intellect, that is, the total person, love is a strong and intensive concern for the well being of the person loved. And it is because of this concern that love may be pictured as a purifying fire, blazing out in fiery wrath against everything evil that hinders the loved one from being the best (Psa. 119:74; Prov. 3:11-12; Heb, 12:5-10; Rev. 3:19). Because of this intense love which is jealous for the good of the loved one, God hates everything that is evil in man (Psa. 5:5; 11:5; Prov. 6:16-19; Jer. 44:4; Heb. 1:13; Zech. 8:16-17). Hence the wrath of God is not opposed to His love. But rather it is the reverse side of His love. God’s wrath is the direct personal opposition of His love to the sin that would destroy man whom He loves.
The wrath of God is directed against sin in any form (Jer. 21:12; Ezek. 8:17-18; 22:29,31; Rom. 1:18). But it is particularly directed against the sin of idolatry.
“14 You shall not go after other gods, the gods of peoples who are round about you; 15 for the Lord your God in the midst of you is a jealous God; lest the anger of the Lord your God be kindled against you, and he destroy you off the face of the earth.” (Deut. 6:14-15) (See also Deut. 4:25-26; 29:25-28; Joshua 23:15-16; Isa. 66:15-17; Jer. 11:11-13; 19:3-4; 44:2-6;
Ex. 32:10,35; Num. 25:3; Lam. 3:42-43; Judges 2:11-15; II Kings 17:9-12; 15-18.)
Idolatry is not just the worship of graven images made of wood, stone or metal (Col. 3:5; see also Eph. 5:5). The false gods whose worship is idolatry are not always so crude or absurd. Many things such as pleasure, wealth, power, education, the family, society, the state, democracy, experience, reason and science, which are good in their proper place, may become a person’s god. One of these sophisticated deities has recently been given the following public confession:
“Men bet their lives on it [science] as they do on other gods, and on the record, it functions no less divinely than any other …. ‘God’ is no less fitting an appellation for this [science] than for any that churchmem so name and require laymen to bet their lives on, worship and adjure.” [17]
Science, of course, is not the only god to which modern man looks for deliverance. Today’s pantheon is as full of gods as those of ancient Greece and Rome. The only difference is that these twentieth century gods are not so easily identified as such. They have become more sophisticated and civilized. But the absence of a label does not alter the content of the package. Although anonymous, they are none the less gods when they become the object of faith and trust in a man’s life. If anything, they are more dangerous and deceptive because they are not generally recognized as gods. What is a god? Martin Luther in his comments on the first commandment in his Large Catechism answers this question very clearly:
“A god is that to which we look for all good and in which we find refuge in every time of need. To have a god is nothing else than to trust and believe in him with our whole heart. As I have often said, the trust and faith of the heart alone make both God and the idol … For these two belong together, faith and God. That to which your heart clings and entrusts itself is, I say, really your God.” [18]
Faith is the commitment and devotion of a person to some object which is for that person of ultimate significance and supreme importance. That object to which a person is committed and devoted is that person’s “god.” The term “god” need not refer to the personal triune God of the Christian religion nor to the object of faith and trust of any historical or formal religion. It is a functional term, that is, a term which takes its meaning from the particular function or operation performed by the object to which the term applies. A god performs the function of the object of supreme importance and ultimate significance to which a person or group of persons may commit and devote themselves.
“Taken by itself this word [god] carries as little specific meaning as the word ‘good.’ Both are empty receptacles whose content varies from man to man and from religion to religion.” [19]
At the suggestion that he worships a god, the irreligious may be shocked and incredulous. But every man must have a god. By his very constitution a man must necessarily have a god to which he can commit and devote himself, in which he can trust. This is apparent from an analysis of human freedom. There are three elements in every decision:
(1) an agent with the ability to choose,
(2) the alternatives to choose between, and
(3) the criterion by which the choice is to be made.
This last element is often overlooked or ignored in the analysis of freedom. The choice between the alternatives is made with reference to some criterion of choice, and the choice cannot be made without this reference. That is, it is impossible to make any decision as to how to act or think without appealing to some criterion of the good and the true. Every human decision necessarily involves a relationship to something in or beyond the self as a criterion of decision. In other words, behind every decision as to what a person should do or think there must be a reason. And the ultimate reason for any decision, practical or theoretical, must be given in terms of some particular criterion, an ultimate reference or orientation point in or beyond the self or person making the decision. This ultimate criterion is that person’s god. In this sense, every man must have god, that is, an ultimate criterion of decision. Thus in the very exercise of his freedom – decision – man shows he is a creature who must have a god.
From this point of view, no man is an atheist in the basic meaning of the word, that is, no god. Every man must have a god. Man is a religious animal who necessarily must have some object of ultimate allegiance and trust which functions as his guide of truth and his norm of conduct. Every man must choose a god. Though free to adopt the god of his choice, no man is free to advoid this decision. Every attempt to do so turns out to be not a denial of having a god but an exchange of gods. To ask whether one believes in the existence of God is to completely misunderstand the issue. The issue is not whether one should choose between theism or atheism, that is, to believe in the existence of God or not, but whether one should choose this god or that god as the true God. The atheist’s god is that there is no god, and he wants you to accept his god.
Since everyone must have a god, the crucial question for every man is: which god is the true God? Or to put the question differently: how are we to distinguish between the one true God on the one hand, and the many false gods on the other? In other words, by what means can we determine which of all possible gods are pretenders and which is the true one? The clue to the answer to these questions may be found in a further analysis of freedom.
By freedom we do not mean purposeless caprice or chance, indeterminism, but rather the ability of choice, freedom of decision, self-determination. Neither is this freedom an abstract entity, “freedom-in-general,” Freiheit, but rather the concrete decision of someone, of a free agent. The most appropriate word for such a being who has such freedom is the word “person.” A person is a being that is self-determining, not determined, who has freedom, free will, the ability to choose. A person is to be distinguished from a non-person, a thing, an “it,” a being that is determined, not self-determining, that has no freedom, no free will, no ability to choose.
A god that is a thing has less freedom than the person who chooses it. Such a god does not have as much freedom as its worshippers. Now a god who does not have at least the same freedom as man himself cannot be the true God. For if a god has less freedom than its worshippers, it cannot do any more for them than they can do for themselves. Such a god is only the projection of the whims and fancies of the worshippers because it is in reality inferior to its worshippers. As a minimum criterion, therefore, a god can be recognized as a false god if it has less freedom than man himself. An impersonal or non-personal god is, therefore, a false god. The true God, on the other hand, must be at least a person in order to have at least as much freedom as the one who chooses him as his god. But the true God must not only be a person, He must also have unlimited freedom if He is to be able to do the things that He has promises and to deiver the one who cries to Him in trouble and need. A god without unlimited freedom might not be able to keep his promises or to save the one who cries to Him for help. Therefore, a god that does not have unlimited freedom must be a false god. The prophet Isaiah applies this criterion to the denumciation of idolatry.
“6 Those who lavish gold from the purse, and weigh out silver in the scales, hire a goldsmith, and he makes it into a god; then they fall down and worship! 7 They lift it upon their shoulders, they carry it, they set it in its place. If one cries to it, it does not answer or save him from his trouble.” (Isa. 46:6-7; See also Isa. 44:18-20; 45:20-21; Psa. 115:2-7; 135:5-7,15-17)
The true God, on the other hand, has unlimited freedom; He can do whatever He pleases (Psa. 115:3; 135:6); He can save when He is called upon (Isa. 43:11; 45:15-17). The true God, therefore, is a person (or persons) with unlimited freedom.
The classic illustration of the application of these criteria for determining which god is the true God is found in the story of Elijah and the prophets of Baal (I Kings 18:17-39 NAS). After challenging the apostate people of Israel to make up their minds between Jehovah and Baal: “If Jehovah be God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” (verse 21, ARV), Elijah proposed a very concrete test by which the true God may be known and the false god be exposed as a fraud.
“23 Now let them give us two oxen; and let them choose one ox for themselves and cut it up, and place it on the wood, but put no fire under it; and I will prepare the other ox, and lay it on the wood, and I will not put a fire under it. 24 Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the Lord, and the God who answers by fire, He is God.” (verses 23-24 NAS)
The test is to see which god can produce. For a false god cannot answer when it is called upon; it cannot act to deliver the one who cries to it in trouble or need.
“26 Then they [the prophets of Baal] took the ox which was given to them and they prepared it and called on the name of Baal, from morning until noon saying, ‘O Baal, answer us.’ But there was no voice and no one answered … 29 And it came about when midday was past, that they raved until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice; but there was no voice, no one answered, and no one paid attention.” (verses 26, 29 NAS)
By this test, all false gods may be detected: a false god cannot produce, cannot respond when called upon. Elijah’s proposal was the application of this test to determine which of the two rival gods, Jehovah or Baal, was the pretender and which was the true God. Elijah, like the other prophets of the true God, Jehovah, did not hesitate to apply this test because he knew what the true God could do.
“36 Then it came about at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the prophet came near and said, ‘O Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Isarel, today let it be known that Thou art God in Israel, and that I am Thy servant, and that I have done all these things at Thy word! 37 Answer me, O Lord, answer me, that this people may know Thou, O Lord, art God, and that Thou hast turned their hearts back again.’ 38 Then fire of the Lord fell, and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. 39 And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces; and they said, ‘The Lord, He is God; the Lord, He is God.'” (verses 36-39 NAS; see also Isa. 46:1-11; 40:18-26; Jer. 10:6-16)
Not only are false gods unable to produce, but they visit their worshippers with the opposite of what they promise. They entice their worshippers with glittering prospects, but then visit them with cruel disillusionment. The worshippers of a false god are betrayed into the opposite of what they want.
“Then Elijah said to them, ‘Seize the prophets of Baal; do not let one of them escape.’ So they seized them; and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there.” (verse 40 NAS)
The modern sophisticated gods also disappoint their worshippers. For example, the god of Reason betrays its followers into blind irrationalism. Witness the irrationalism of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution which was carried on in the name of Reason. Why cannot false gods produce? Some false gods cannot produce because they are non-persons, things. This is the point of Elijah’s taunts of the prophets of Baal.
“And it came about at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, ‘Call out with a loud voice, for he is god; either he is occupied or gone aside, or is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and needs to be awakened.'” (verse 27 NAS)
Baal could not answer because he was not a person who could. It was not because he was preoccupied with musing, journeying, sleeping or anything else that he did not answer. He could not because he was not a being that could. A person is a being that is self-determining, that has free will. And Baal was not that kind of being. It did not even have as much freedom as its worshippers. Here we have our first and minimum criterion for determining which of all possible gods are pretenders and which is the true God – a god is a false god if it does not have as much freedom as man himself; that is, if it is not self-determining, if it is a thing. But other gods who are persons cannot produce because their freedom is limited. They do not have any more freedom than their worshippers and hence cannot do any more than their followers. Here we have our second criterion for determining which god is the true God: a god is a false god if it does not have more freedom than man himself, a false god has limited freedom. It should now be obvious why false gods cannot produce. They either do not have freedom, self-determination, or their freedom is limited. The true God, since he has freedom – he is a person or persons – and his freedom is unlimited – he is all powerful and can fulfill the promises he can make; he can answer when he is called upon and deliver the one who cries to him in trouble and need. The Apostle Paul in the first chapter of his letter to the Romans also refers to these same criteria to show that man is without excuse for his idolatry.
“19 Because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world the invisible things of Him, both His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, so that they are without excuse.” (Rom. 1:19-20 ERS)
In verse 19, Paul refers to a knowledge of God which all men have and in verse 20 he says two things about this knowledge:
(a) This knowledge is a knowledge of the “invisible things of him,” of God, namely, “his eternal power and Godhead” or divine nature.
(b) These two “invisible things of him…are clearly seen (verse 20), that is, manifested, laid open to public view (verse 19).
This paradoxical way of stating the source of this knowledge raises the question: how are these unseen things clearly seen? The answer is given in the phrase “being understood by the things that are made (verse 20). They are seen by a rational act, the act of the mind, “by the things that are made”. For the things that are made are analogous in their being to the unseen things of Him. That which God created reflects the invisible things of Him, the Creator, like a work of art reflects the artist. (Of course, this analogy of the artist and his work cannot be applied to the Creator and His creation without reservations.) All examples of power in the physical world, the earthquakes, storms, even nuclear energy, are like God’s eternal power. The creation reflects the Creator in His power. If this be so, then what in all creation is like His Godhead or divine nature? Only man himself is analoguous to God’s divine nature because man alone has been created in the image of God (compare verse 19: “that which is known of God is manifest in them“). Man’s person is similar to God’s person. Paul uses this same analogy between God’s being and man’s being in his address on Mars Hill, the Areopagus, in Athens recorded in Acts 17:22-31, to argue against idolatry. After he had quoted one of the Greek’s own poets as saying “For we are also his offspring,” Paul argues,
“Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man.” (Acts 17:29 NAS; Compare to theion translated “Divine nature” in this verse with theiotes in Rom. 1:20 which is also translated “divine nature” NAS.)
Since we were created by God in His image, the nature of God must be at least as personal as our nature. Therefore, the true God cannot be a non-person, a thing made of gold or silver or stone, an image made by man. God’s being must be as personal as our being, if we are the offspring of God, that is, created in His image.
But not only is it true that in man alone is there found that which is like God’s being, but it is also true that in man alone is there found that which is the best analogy of God’s eternal power. The human will in its limited power and freedom is the best analogy in all creation of the divine will with its unlimited power and freedom. (Note that power, dunamis, means “to be able”, dunamai.) What greater created power is there than the power to bless or destroy? In this sense, the human power to choose to use the nuclear bomb is greater than the power of the bomb itself. The power of human freedom of decision is greater than the power of physical energy. In man, therefore, we find that which is the analogy in creation of God’s eternal power and His divine personal nature. The mind of man employing these analogies of being perceives the invisible things of Him through the things that are made or created by God. Thus “God manifest it [the truth] unto them” (verse 19). The unseen things of God are clearly seen because that which is known of God is manifested in them. So man is without excuse for his idolatry, exchanging the truth about God for a lie and worshipping and serving the creature rather than the Creator (Rom. 1:25). Man has no excuse for choosing a false god. He knows that it is not the true God because a false god is impersonal and/or powerless; it is less of a person than he is and has as little or less power or freedom than he has.
It is this knowledge of what the true God must be like that lies behind all primitive religions, with their anthropomorphic gods. Primitive man knows what a god must be like in order to be the true God. This knowledge derived intuitively from the nature of his freedom makes him uneasy about the things that he worships as god. He knows that the true God must be a living God. But having failed to encounter such a God, he fills the vacuum with what he imagines to be facsimile of Him. And since the highest living being he knows is himself, he makes gods in his own image. He also knows that the true God must be a God of unlimited power, not limited like himself. He therefore identifies these anthropomorphic creations with the powerful forces that he sees in the physical world about him. Beyond the simple and profound suspicion that such a God does exist, he is at the end of his knowledge (“…whom ye ignorantly worship…” Acts 17:23 KJV).
In what way can man find any additional knowledge of the true God? In the same way in which he gets knowledge about another person: by what the other person says and does. But the initiative lies with the other person. If he remains silent and inactive, no knowledge is available in addition to the fact that he is there. Therefore, if man is to know anything additional about the true God, God must take the initiative and reveal Himself in word and/or deed. And God has taken the initiative and has revealed Himself in word and deed. The Bible is a record of the “words and the mighty acts of God.” The true God is not silent and He is not inactive; He has spoken and He has acted. This is recorded for us in a book, the Bible. And we know that these are the words and deeds of the true God because they are the words and the acts of a God who is a personal being and has unlimited freedom. The God who is revealed in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament is the living God who created all things.
(The living God – Joshua 3:10; I Sam. 17:26; Psa. 84:2; Jer. 10:10; Matt. 16:16; Acts 14:15; I Thess. 1:9; I Tim. 3:15; Heb. 10:31;
The Creator – Gen. 1:1; 2:3-4; Ex. 4:11; Neh. 9:6; Job 38:4; Psa. 90:2; 102:25; 104:1-5, 24; Isa. 40:28; 44:24; 45:11-12, 18; 48:12-13; Jer. 10:11-12; John 1:1-3; Acts 17:24; I Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2, 10; 11:3; Rev. 4:11).
Because He is a person, He is alive; and because He has unlimited freedom, He is the all powerful Creator of all things. The God of the Bible is the true God, and all other gods are false. The choice of any other god than this one is idolatry.
Idolatry is the basic sin. This may be clearly seen from the Ten Commandments of the Mosaic law. For the first two commandments are about the sin of idolatry.
“3 You shall have no other gods before me. 4 You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
(Exodus 20:3-6; see also Deut. 5:7-10)
This is because a false god usurps the place of the true God in a man’s life. In a sense, all sins are against God (Compare II Sam. 12:13; Job 7:20; Psa. 41:4; 51:4), but the sin of idolatry is very clearly directed against God Himself. It is a direct repudiation of the Creator for the creature; it is a direct insult to the true God and an affront to His divine majesty. No more serious sin could be imagined than this one. Since it is the most serious sin, it is also the most basic.
The basic sin is not only not to trust in the true God but to trust in something other than the true God. This is the sin of sins. Rebellion against, unbelief in, and disobedience to the Creator, bad as they are, are only negative sins – rebellion is the rejection of God’s authority; unbelief is not to trust in God’s love; and disobedience is not to obey God’s commands. But idolatry is a positive sin which turns to an alternate and replacement for the true God. It is to give one’s allegiance, trust and obedience to something other than the One who should have that allegiance, trust and obedience. It is the more serious sin. As Samuel said to Saul: “For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and insubordination is as iniquity and idolary.” (I Sam. 15:23). Samuel compares rebellion and insubordination with the more serious sin of idolatry. (Divination in the Old Testament times was almost always asscociated with idolatry [Deut. 4:19; 17:3; 18:9-14; II Kings 17:16-17; Isa. 41:21-24; Ezek. 13:17-23; 21:21-22]. The parallelism in I Sam. 15:23 shows that idolatry and divination are nearly synonymous.) Rebellion and insubordination are only the negative side of the sin of idolatry; that is, the act of turning against the true God is only negative part of the act of turning to a false god. Idolatry is the more serious sin and hence the more basic sin.
But idolatry is also the basic sin because this sin leads to other sins. It leads to other sins because a person’s god, being his ultimate criterion of decision, ultimately controls the direction and character of a man’s decisions. The choice of a wrong god will lead to other wrong choices. That is, the god to which a person commits and devotes himself will determine the quality of his whole life. It furnishes him with an entire set of values and these values will in turn govern his every specific decision, intellectual and practical. Thus every god stamps its worshippers with its own trademark. In fact, the worshipper becomes like the god he worships. As the Psalmist says concerning the idolater,
“4 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. 5 They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see. 6 They have ears, but do not hear; noses, but do not smell. 7 They have hands, but do not feel; feet, but do not walk; and they do not make a sound in their throat. 8 Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them.”
(Psa. 115:4-8; see also Psa. 135:15-18)
Since out of the heart are the issues of life (Prov. 4:23), and as a man thinks in his heart, so is he (Prov. 23:7), then what a man has set up in his heart as his god will affect the quality and character of his whole life. It is what a man believes in his heart that determines what he says and does. As Jesus said, “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matt. 12:33-35; Luke 6:43-45). Thus if a man sets up an idol in his heart (Ezek. 14:3-5), then out of the heart will come all manner of sins. Jesus recognized this when he declared,
“21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man.”
(Mark 7:21-23; compare Matt. 15:15-20)
Thus if in his heart a man clings to a false god, his actions and speech will show it. In this way also idolatry is the basic sin. From the discussion of idolatry as the basic sin it should be clear that sin in general must be defined in terms of the true God. Accordingly, sin should be defined as any free, uncoerced act of the will (decision, choice) that is contrary to ultimate personal allegiance to the true God. That is, “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23 KJV). In other words, sin is any choice that is contrary to faith and trust in the true God (John 16:9; compare John 3:18). According to this definition, unbelief (infidelity, not incredulity) is sin. But so are disobedience and rebellion sins. It is not just any unbelief that is sin but unbelief in God. Unbelief as such is not sin. Unbelief is sin only in reference to God; it is sin only when it is God who is not trusted. Similarly with respect to disobedience and rebellion. Disobedience as such is not sin, neither is rebellion. They are sin only in reference to God. Disobedience is sin only when it is God who is disobeyed; and rebellion is sin only when it is God who is rebelled against. Sin in all cases must be defined in terms of true God.
But because man must have a god, sin is more than not trusting in the true God; it is trusting in a false god. A man must make his decision with reference to the true God or some false one. No middle ground exists. To be is to choose, and to choose is to have a god. To be, therefore, is to have a god. By the structure of his freedom, the being of man is necessarily linked to some god. Therefore, if a man does not trust in the true God, he will trust in a false god. In fact, a man does not trust in the true God because he has put his trust in a false god. In general, the rejection of one god can only be done in the name of another. Accordingly, sin is more than unbelief, not trusting in God; it is trusting in a false god. Similarly, sin is more than disobedience, not obeying God; it is obedience to a false god. Likewise, sin is more than rebellion against God; it is allegiance to a false god. Sin, in general, is not only any choice contrary to faith and trust in true God, but it is also any choice that implies faith and trust in a false god.
The choice of a false god leads to bondage, the bondage of sin. Idolatry results in the bondage of sin in two senses.
1. Since idolatry is the basic sin, it leads to other sins. Because a person’s god, being his ultimate criterion of all his decisions, ultimately controls the direction and character of his decisions, the wrong choice of a false god will lead to other wrong choices, sins. A person committed to a false god does not necessarily always have to commit sins. Happily, he is often inconsistent in following his false god. But since his god furnishes him with an entire set of values and motives for his choices, the sin of idolatry will usually invariably result in other sins. This invariableness of sin is one aspect of the bondage of sin. As Jesus said, “…every one who commits sin is a slave of sin.” (John 8:34)
2. The second sense in which idolatry results in the bondage of sin is that idolatry reduces and ultimately will destroy one’s freedom of choice. A false god, having become the repository of a man’s trust and allegiance, proceeds immediately to reduce and ultimately to destroy his freedom. It becomes a straight-jacket and a limitation on his freedom. Thus it reduces his freedom of choice by limiting his options as well as his reasons for his choice. Some false gods totally eliminate some areas of life from its followers consideration. Thus a false god circumscribes and restricts the freedom of choice of the person who chooses it as his god; it acts as a frustrating limitation, a ball and chain upon the exercise of the freedom of its worshipper. But a false god also destroys the freedom of its worshipper by denying his freedom. Since a false god is a being that has limited or no freedom or power of choice (it is determined and not self-determining) such a god by implication denies the reality of followers freedom of choice. Thus having used his freedom to give this god his ultimate allegiance, the worshipper finds his freedom denied to the point of extinction and himself bound in a miserable slavery. As long as the false god remains his ultimate criterion of decision, he will not have the grounds for rejecting that god, since that god has not allowed him to have freedom of choice to do so. His power of choice having been taken away from him, he is unable to reject the false god and free himself from its bondage. This is the bondage of sin (John 8:34; Prov. 5:22). Man becomes a slave of sin when he gives his ultimate allegiance and devotion to a false god. In fact, the false god is sin personified as a slavemaster (Rom. 6:16).
The wrath of God is directed particularly against the sin of idolatry because it is the basic sin. But more fundamentally it is directed against this sin because of the effect that a false god has upon the one who chooses it as his god. A false god destroys the freedom of its worshipper by putting him into bondage. The true God, on the other hand, not only sets the worshipper of a false god free from the its bondage, but also preserves and fulfills the freedom of the one who chooses and worships Him. Since the true God is a living God (Jer. 10:5-15; I Thess. 1:9), that is, a being that has the power of self-determination, with unlimited freedom, He can preserve His worshipper’s freedom. When this Being who has such freedom is made the ultimate criterion of one’s decisions, one’s freedom of choice may be exercised without restriction or frustrating limitation. But more importantly, the true God not only preserves the freedom of the one who chooses and worships Him but also fulfills the freedom of the one who commits and devotes himself to Him. This He does by loving him, that is, by acting toward him for his highest good. Now man’s highest good is the true God; He alone can preserve the freedom of the one who chooses Him. For when a man chooses the true God as his God, he has found his highest good and obtained true happiness (Prov. 16:20; Psa. 40:4; 84:12; 144:15; Jer. 17:7, etc.). Because the true God is love (I John 4:8, 16), He acts toward man in such a way as to bring man to the choice of man’s highest good, that is, the true God, and hence the fulfillment of his freedom. One way He does this is by directly opposing (i.e., the wrath of God) man’s choice of a false god (the sin of idolatry). Since idolatry not only destroys man’s freedom but is an obstacle to God’s love which would fulfill man’s freedom, the wrath of God is directed against this particular sin. But wrath is not the only way that God in His love deals with man’s sin. The wrath of God is not the only nor the last word about what God has said or done concerning man’s sin. God’s wrath is His strange work.
“The Lord will rise up as on Mount Perazim, he will be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon; to do his deed – strange is his deed!
and to work his work – alien is his work!” (Isa. 28:21)
It is that act of His love that is alien to the way God wishes to act. He desires to act toward man in mercy and grace (Psa. 103:9-12; Micah 7:18-19). In mercy, He desires to turn away His wrath and forgive man’s sin (Psa. 85:2-3). And in grace, He desires to remove the sin which causes His wrath. This is the other way that God in His love deals with man’s sin. Thus, God deals with man’s sin in two ways. In His wrath, He opposes the sin, and in His grace He removes it: the grace of God is the love of God in action to bring man salvation (Titus 2:11; Eph. 2:8). In this second way, God fulfills man’s freedom; He removes the idolatry which would destroy man’s freedom. And this He does by removing the cause of sin – death – through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Therefore, the wrath of God is not opposed to His love. But rather it is one of the two ways in which God in His love deals with man’s sin. God’s wrath as well as His grace is an expression of His love. There is no eternal principle of divine retribution (justice) in God which causes His wrath. Since God is love, the wrath of God must be understood in terms of His love as the direct personal opposition of His love to sin that would destroy the one whom He loves. Wrath is the reaction of His love to sin. The cause of God’s wrath is not in God; it is external to God and in the sin of man. And as long as man remains in sin, so long does the wrath of God remain upon him (John 3:36).
Man is under the wrath of God because of his sin of idolatry (Rom. 1:18-25); that is, the wrath of God is caused by sin; it is a direct consequence of each man’s own sin. But since man is a sinner as a consequence of Adam’s sin (Rom. 5:19a), then the wrath of God is also a result of Adam’s sin (Rom. 5:18a; note that condemnation is the same as wrath). But it is only indirectly, not directly, a result of Adam’s sin. For all men are sinners only indirectly as a consequence of Adam’s sin. They are sinners directly because of the spiritual death (Rom. 5:12d; Gal.4:8), which they have received from Adam (Rom. 5:12c; I Cor. 15:22). Sin is the direct consequence of spiritual death and hence only an indirect consequence of Adam’s sin (the spiritual and physical death only came directly from Adam). And since man is a sinner as an indirect consequence of Adam’s sin, then the wrath of God (condemnation) is also an indirect consequence of Adam’s sin. Condemnation is not the direct result of Adam’s sin; that is, man is not condemned because of Adam’s sin but because of his own personal sin, his own choice of a false god. The cause of the wrath of God is the sin of each individual man (Ezek. 18:1-4, 14-20).
The activity of the wrath of God is not an impersonal law of retribution or the inevitable moral effect of sin, as advocated by C. H. Dodd. [20] The wrath of God is God’s personal reaction to man’s sin. This is seen in the Old Testament writers’ use of strong personal terms when speaking of the wrath of God.
“1 O God, Thou has rejected us. Thou hast broken us; Thou has been angry; … 2 Thou hast made the land quake; 3 Thou hast made Thy people experience hardship; … Thou hast given us wine to drink that make us stagger.” (Psa. 60:1-3)
“27 Behold, the name of the Lord comes from a remote place; Burning is His anger, and dense is His smoke; His lips are filled with indignation, and His tongue is like a consuming fire; 28 And His breath is like an overflowing torrent, Which reaches to the neck, To shake the nations back and forth in a sieve, And to put in the jaws of the peoples the bridle which leads to ruin … 30 And the Lord will cause His voice of authority to be heard. And the descending of His arm to be seen, And in the flame of a consuming fire, In a cloudburst, downpour, and hailstones, 31 For at the voice of the Lord Assyria will be terrified, When He strikes with the rod.” (Isa. 30:27-28, 30-31)
“The anger of the Lord will not turn back until He has performed and carried out the purposes of His heart; …” (Jer. 23:20)
“8 Now I will shortly pour out My wrath on you, and send My anger against you, judge you according to your ways, and bring on you all your abominations. 9 And My eye will show no pity, nor will I spare. I will repay you according to your ways, while your abominations are in your midst; then you will know that I, the Lord, do the smiting.” (Ezek. 7:8-9).
The psalmist and prophets could hardly have expressed more strongly the personal aspect of God’s wrath. The wrath of God in these passages is definitely not an impersonal, inexorable law of moral retribution. God personally wills His deeds of wrath against man’s sin. And because God is so personally active in His deeds of wrath, He can exercise His mercy, allowing His wrath to be turned away.
“9 He will not always chide, nor will He keep His anger forever. 10 He does not deal with us according to our sin, nor requite us according to our iniquities. 11 For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is His steadfast love toward those who fear Him; 12 As far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us.” (Psa. 103:9-12)
“2 Thou didst forgive the iniquity of Thy people; Thou didst cover all their sin. 3 Thou didst withdraw all Thy fury; Thou didst turn away from Thy burning anger.” (Psa. 85:2-3)
“18 Who is a God like Thee, who pardons iniquity and passes over the rebellious act of the remnant of His inhertance? He does not retain His anger forever, Because He delights in lovingkindness. 19 He will again have compassion on us; He will tread our iniquities underfoot. Yes, Thou wilt cast all our sins into the depth of the sea.” (Micah 7:18-19; See also Exodus 34:6-7; Numbers 14:18; Neh. 9:17; Psa. 30:5; 86:15; 145:8; Isa. 57:16; Lam. 3:22-23; Joel 2:12-13; Jonah 4:2; Nahum 1:2-3.)
That God will have mercy, turning away His wrath, is not contradicted by the statement that “the anger of the Lord will not turn back” (Jer. 23:10), for this does not mean that He is implacable, but only that He is not diverted from His purposes by puny man. “The anger of the Lord will not be turned back until He has performed and carried out the purpose of His heart…” (Jer. 23:20). This statement is just a denial of the pagan idea that God will accept a bribe to appease His anger.
The means by which God’s wrath may be turned aside involves the purging of the sin. This may be done, for example, by completely destroying the offending city (Deut. 13:15-17), slaying those who had sinned as at Baal-Peor (Num. 25:4), releasing captives (II Chron. 28:11-13), putting away heathen wives (Ezra 10:14). The putting away of sin involves a change of heart attitude, repentance (Jonah 3:7,10), humbling oneself (II Chron. 12:7), circumcising the heart (Jer. 4:4) and doing judgment (Jer. 21:12). It is the absence of this inward change of heart and attitude and the corresponding outward change in actions that brought about the rejection and condemnation by the psalmists and prophets of the divinely appointed system of offerings and sacrifices.
“And Samuel said, ‘Has the Lord as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams.'” (I Sam. 15:22)
“16 For Thou dost not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it; Thou art not pleased with burnt offerings. 17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; A broken and contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise.” (Psa. 51:16-17)
“For I delight in loyalty rather than sacrifice, and in the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.” (Hosea 6:6; See also Psa. 4:5; 40:6-8; 50:7-23; 69:30-31; Prov. 15:8; 21:3; Isa. 1:11-17; Jer. 7:21-26; Amos 5:21-24; Micah 6:6-8.)
These divinely appointed offerings and sacrifices were intended to be a means of turning away God’s wrath, but the absence of a correct inward heart attitude and the corresponding correct outward actions made them into an empty ritual and an abomination to God. Without repentance and faith they ceased to be an atonement or means of propitiation.
The Old Testament sacrifices could never take away sin (Heb. 10:4, 11). On the contrary, there is in those sacrifices a continual remembrance of sin year by year (Heb. 10:3). That is, the worshippers, not having been cleansed of their sins, still have a consciousness of sin (Heb. 10:2). Therefore, those that draw near could never be made perfect by those sacrifices (Heb. 10:1). But Christ has put away sin once for all by the sacrifice of Himself (Heb. 9:26; 10:12), and has made perfect them that are being sanctified or set apart to God (Heb. 10:14). Now there is no more remembrance of sins (Heb. 10:17), since those drawing near having been cleansed from their sins have no more consciousness of sins (Heb. 10:22). It was to accomplish our cleansing for sin that Christ “gave Himself for our sins” (Gal. 1:4) and “died for our sins” (I Cor. 15:3). God acted in Jesus Christ to redeem us from sin.
Because God has redeemed us from sin, we also are delivered from the wrath of God. Salvation is not only deliverance from sin but also deliverance from the wrath of God (Rom. 5:9). God put forth Jesus Christ as a propitiation through faith in His blood (Rom. 3:25). The death of Jesus Christ is a propitiation because it is the means that God has appointed for turning away His wrath from man. While God in His love could have mercy on man and turn away His wrath from man (Psa. 78:38; Exodus 34:6; Numbers 14:19-20), He has appointed means whereby His wrath will be turned away. In the Old Testament, God’s appointed means for turning away His wrath were the sacrifices and offerings. When these sacrifices were offered in true repentance and faith, they were an atonement or propitiation. But these sacrifices could never take away sin (Heb. 10:4, 11), that is, they could not bring about repentance and faith, because they could not make alive (Gal. 3:21). The Old Testament sacrifices could not reconcile man to God. But through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, man is reconciled to God and his sins are taken away. And since there are no sins to cause wrath, the wrath of God is turned away. No sin, no wrath. Thus Christ’s death is the perfect sacrifice for turning away God’s wrath because by it man is redeemed from sin. Christ’s death is a propitiation because it is a redemption; it is both a propitiation and a redemption. Propitiation is the sacrifical aspect of Christ’s work of salvation, and redemption is the liberation aspect of Christ’s work of salvation. Christ’s death is a propitiation, turning away God’s wrath, because it is also a redemption, the setting free from sin, taking away sin. And it is a propitiation and a redemption because it is a reconciliation to God. Being made alive to God, death, the cause of sin, has been removed, and being liberated from sin, wrath has been removed.
To Continue, Click here.
END NOTES
[16] Leon Morris, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross
(Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1956), p. 181.
[17] Horace M. Kallen, Democracy’s True Religion
(Boston: The Beacon Press, 1951), p. 10; quoted in E. LaB. Cherbonnier,
Hardness of Heart (New York: Doubleday & Co., 1955), p. 153.
[18] Martin Luther, The Large Catechism of Martin Luther,
trans. Robert H. Fischer (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), p. 9.
[19] Cherbonnier, Hardness of Heart, p. 40.
[20] C. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans
(London: Fontana Books, 1960), pp. 49-50.