When I was in high school sixty-some years ago, English literature textbooks included the 1741 Jonathan Edwards sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God as viewed as an archaic misrepresentation of a loving God. Yet, in the context of those who would scorn Him, an ‘angry’ God seems more appropriate than the ‘loving’ representation of a God who overlooks sin.
When the Assyrian commander, Rabshakeh, scorns God as incapable of stopping the Assyrian invaders having their way with Judah, Assyria falls into the hands of the angry God.
Hezekiah receives the letter from the messengers, reads it, then Hezekiah goes up to the house of the Lᴏʀᴅ, and spreads it before the Lᴏʀᴅ. And Hezekiah prayed to the Lᴏʀᴅ,
The first Assyrian challenge had been verbal and when Assyria was redirected into another military campaign, this letter was sent to remind Hezekiah Assyria would be back demanding submission. Hezekiah responds taking it before the Lᴏʀᴅ and asking for God’s intervention so all will know that the Lᴏʀᴅ is Lᴏʀᴅ of all. God’s response to those who scorn Him:
This account ends with the reaping the consequence of arrogance against God, a direct affront against Him for who He is and His Sovereignty over the affairs of man and challenging His ability to complete:
While God is love and desires that none perish, He is willing to allow mankind to receive the consequences of rebellion against Him. Anger? What would you label the appropriate response to ‘raging against the Lᴏʀᴅ’, to trying to take the place of the Creator of all? The permissive will of God is permitting anyone who demands their own arrogance in defying Him to receive the consequence of that way. God does not accept distortion by those who would make Him other than Lᴏʀᴅ.