God is sinless. He is perfect holy being by nature. If he did not oppose sinfulness in man, he would not be God, by inherent definition. If he was not wrathful and warring against sin, God would then, in effect be saying that sinfulness is not evil and can be tolerated. That would be a lie, because sinfulness is evil. But God cannot lie and be untrue to his essential being, which is holy and loving. If God were to tolerate sin in not having a sustained wrath against it, it would mean he accepted sinfulness as a legitimate assault on his holiness (because God is holy) and that he finds human suffering caused by evil to be acceptable. But God is supremely holy and just and he is pure Love. Thus, his nature and being cannot tolerate sinfulness and that which violates who and what he is. Therefore, it is impossible for a just God not to have “wrath” toward sin.
But again, sin is defined as something which opposes god and it need not be necessarily wrong as everything is contingent
If you had read "Thus spoke zarathusthra" by Nietzsche, everything crumbles in itself.
The reason for this mindless babble is just to imply that it is more than just a metaphor..atleast to me.
Regards,
M.
P.S : Half of the argument is not my own...but i kinda plagiarised it to form the foundation for my statement :-)
"God's wrath"...I'd always been fascinated whenever I see that. Never really understood why god would have vengeance though.
ReplyDeleteM.
Metaphor!!
ReplyDeleteThats what it is. One way of saying we deserve what we get.
By the way, Its good to see you back.
Smiles,
Gautami
God is sinless. He is perfect holy being by nature. If he did not oppose sinfulness in man, he would not be God, by inherent definition. If he was not wrathful and warring against sin, God would then, in effect be saying that sinfulness is not evil and can be tolerated. That would be a lie, because sinfulness is evil. But God cannot lie and be untrue to his essential being, which is holy and loving. If God were to tolerate sin in not having a sustained wrath against it, it would mean he accepted sinfulness as a legitimate assault on his holiness (because God is holy) and that he finds human suffering caused by evil to be acceptable. But God is supremely holy and just and he is pure Love. Thus, his nature and being cannot tolerate sinfulness and that which violates who and what he is. Therefore, it is impossible for a just God not to have “wrath” toward sin.
ReplyDeleteBut again, sin is defined as something which opposes god and it need not be necessarily wrong as everything is contingent
If you had read "Thus spoke zarathusthra" by Nietzsche, everything crumbles in itself.
The reason for this mindless babble is just to imply that it is more than just a metaphor..atleast to me.
Regards,
M.
P.S : Half of the argument is not my own...but i kinda plagiarised it to form the foundation for my statement :-)
Actually I agree with you. Its much more than a metaphor. But few see it that way.
ReplyDelete:) Does it matter if you kind of borrowed?
I like what I read.....
:)
Gautami