Robert Sungenis on the Biblical Witness to the Reality of God's Emotions

Commenting on the biblical witness to the reality of God’s emotions (in this instance, anger/wrath), Robert Sungenis noted:

1) Whereas some argue that “anger, can be attributed to God only in an anthropomorphic sense. Anger in Holy Writ means the punitive justice of God,”(Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 45) Scripture shows that God’s anger is sometimes independent of punitive justice, which proves that God can possess the emotive force of anger without demonstrating it with punishment. This is especially true, for example, in Ex 4:14, in which God becomes angry at Moses due to Moses’ continual complaints of not being able to speak eloquently. God does not punish Moses; rather, He offers the services of Aaron to speak for Moses, and blesses Moses afterward (cf. Ps 6:1; 30:5; 80:4; Jr 10:24; Hs 13:11; Gn 18:32).

2) Although anger often results in punitive justice, Scripture is clear that anger itself is often the sequential cause of punitive justice, not merely coincident with justice, nor merely the means to define or explain justice (cf. Ex 32:10; 33:5; Nm 11:1; 12:9-10; Dt 31:17;1Kg 11:9; Is 10:5-6).

3) In many instances, once God’s anger is appeased, mercy follows rather than punitive justice, once again showing the independence of anger from punitive justice (cf. Ex 4:14; 32:9-14; 33:1-5; Nm 11:10; 25:1-13; Dt 9:8, 19-20; 2Sm 24:1; 2Ch 28:11-13; Ps 2:12; 78:38; Jh 3:9-10; Es 46:2; Rm 9:22).

4) Descriptions of God’s anger are often elaborated, which lends credence to the fact that the anger is real, since its intensity varies in response to the particular sin in view (cf. Dt 29:24-28; 2Kg 23:26; Ps 78:49-50; Jr 21:5).

5) Scripture is careful to distinguish God’s anger from the anger of man (Jt 8:15: “For God will not threaten like man, nor be inflamed to anger like the son of man”).

6) Since the Church has made no de fide statement on this issue, it is open for discussion and thus we are not required to understand it only in an anthropomorphic or anthropopathic sense. That being said, however, the Calvinistic interpretation of God’s anger and hate must be rejected, which claimed, among other things, that God’s animosity is arbitrary; does not depend on the free will decision of the creature; and that God ordains the evil of men. (Robert A. Sungenis, Not By Bread Alone: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for the Eucharistic Sacrifice [2d ed.; Catholic Apologetics International Publishing, Inc., 2009], 288-89)

While one disagrees with Sungenis’ main thesis of the book (see Responses to Robert Sungenis, Not By Bread Alone (2000/2009)), he is correct in the above--God's anger is not a mere anthropormorphism--instead, God truly has anger (and other emotions). For more, see his book, The Immutable God Who Can Change His Mind The Impassible God Who Can Show Emotion

See also:

Daniel C. Peterson, On the Motif of the Weeping God in Moses 7 (cf. Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Jacob A. Rennaker and David J. Larsen, Revisiting the Forgotten Voices of Weeping in Moses 7: A Comparison with Ancient Texts)

The issue of God's (true) wrath is an important element in the formation of a theology of the atonement, including the reality of propitiation, not mere expiation, of sin. For a discussion, see my:

Critique of "The Christ Who Heals"

Indeed, one should consider texts such as Ether 2:8 (cf. 3:3) where God speaks of his anger/wrath being kindled and swearing thereby or D&C 121:5 where Joseph Smith requests God to kindle his wrath against the enemies of the Church--such is hard to believe such is a mere figure of speech and not "real" emotion.